PRINCETON,  N.  J. 


BR  743  .J52  1882 
Jennings,  A.  C. 
Ecclesia  anglicana 


S/ie//. 


•"^^ 


J 


ECCLESIA    ANGLICANA 

^  l^istorg  of  tfjc  OTburcfj  of  Cfjtist  \xi  lEnglanl) 
from  tje  iSarlicst  to  tje  present  ^fmcs 


BY    THE    REV. 

ARTHUR   CHARLES^ENNINGS,    M.A. 

JESUS    COLLEGE,    CAMBRIDGE 

(Sometime  Tyrwkitt  Scholar,  Crosse  Scholar,  Hebrew  University  Priseman 

Fry  Scholar  of  S.  John's  College,  Cams  and  Scholefield  Prizeman) 

Vicar  of  IVhitilesford 


THOMAS    WHITTAKER 
2  ^  Z  BIBLE  HOUSE 

MDCCCLXXXII 


TO 

EDWARD    TOWGOOD,  Esq, 

OF   SAWSTOX,   CAMBKroOESHIRE, 

THE  AUTHOR 

DEDICATES   THIS  BOOK, 

AS   A   SMALL   BUT    SINCEKE   TOKEN   OF   AFFECTIONATE   REGAED 

FOR   A   VALrED   FRIEND,    AND   FOR 

A   FAITHFUL   AND   DEVOTED    CHURCHMAN. 


PREFACE. 

This  work  has  been  written  chiefly  with  the  view 
of  meeting  the  wants  of  candidates  for  theological 
examinations  at  Cambridge  and  elsewhere.  Those 
who  have  gone  through  such  ordeals  may  remember 
feeling  the  lack  of  a  concise  account  of  the  whole 
history  of  the  English  Church.  Handy  volumes 
there  were,  which  treated  the  subject  from  the 
sectarian  standpoint,  and  made  the  Keformation  the 
birth-time  of  the  Church,  thus  depriving  her  of  three- 
quarters  of  her  existence.  The  more  appreciative 
authors,  who  admitted  our  claim  to  be  one  with  the 
pra3-Reformation  body,  had  written  too  diffusely 
for  the  very  practical  purposes  of  an  "examinee." 
The  present  author  has  endeavoured  to  include  a 
remote  horizon  on  a  small  canvas,  without  dis- 
paragement either  to  perspective  or  detail.  He  is 
unfeignedly  conscious  of  his  incapacity  to  do  justice 
to  the  conception,  but  hopes  that  the  present 
volume  will,  for  a  time  at  least,  meet  a  long- 
acknowledged  want. 

A.  C.  J. 

November,  1881. 


CONTENTS. 


CHAPTER    I. 

PAGE 

The  Church  of  the  Celts     .....        1 


CHAPTER    II. 

Conversion  op  the  Anglo-Saxons      .  .  .  .20 

CHAPTER  III. 

The  National  Anglo-Saxon  Church  .  .  .33 

CHAPTER  IV. 
Anglo-Noeman  Period  .  .  .  .  .66 

CHAPTER    V. 

The  Thirteenth  Century      .  .  .  .  .94 

CHAPTER    VI. 
The  Fourteenth  and  Fifteenth  Centuries        .  .112 

CHAPTER   VII. 
Henry  VIII.     .  .  .  .  .  .  .136 

CHAPTER  VIII. 
Henry  VIII. — continued  .  .  .  .  .     163 

CHAPTER    IX. 
Edward  VI.      .  .  .  .  .  .  .203 


viii  CONTENTS. 

CHAPTER   X. 

PAGF. 

Mary 241 

CHAPTER  XL 
Elizabeth  .......     279 

CHAPTER   Xir. 
Elizabeth— co??h*HrtefZ  ......     324 

CHAPTER    XIII. 
James  I.  .......     341 

CHAPTER   XIV. 
Charles  I.         ......  .    3fi2 

CHAPTER    XV. 
The  Interregnum         ......    397 

CHAPTER   XVI. 
Charles  II.       ......  .     403 

CHAPTER   XVII. 
James  II.  to  George  I.  .  .  .  ,  .421 

CHAPTER   XVIII. 
The  Georgian  Period  .....    451 

CHAPTER  XIX. 

The  Church  op  the  Present  Day  ....    473 

iNi^EX 487 


ECCLESIA    ANGLICANA. 


CHAPTER  I. 
Zi)t  mjnxdj  of  t\)t  ©clt0. 

Its  connection  with  the  Church  of  England— Early  testimony  to  its  existence 
— Traditional  accounts  of  its  origin — Perhaps  an  offshoot  of  the  Church  of 
Gaul — The  British  martyrs  in  the  tenth  persecution — British  delegates  at  the 
Church  Councils— British  heretics — The  mission  of  Germanus — Palladius  and 
Patrick  in  Ireland — The  Welsh  mission  to  Ireland — Irish  and  Welsh  missions 
to  Scotland— Decadence  of  the  Church  in  "  England  "—Severance  of  Celts  and 
Saxons— The  subsequent  missions  from  Scotland— Peculiarities  of  the  Celtic 
Church — Disproportionate  number  of  bishops — Numerous  monasteries — Pecu- 
liarities in  computation  of  Easter — In  Baptism,  the  tonsure,  and  consecration 
of  bishops. 

Regarded  as  a  political  institution,  the  ChurcL.  of  Ene:-  itsconnec- 

iTi'.i-  •  1  1  1  tionwith 

Jand  begins  its  history  m  the  seventh  century,  when,  the  church 
Saxon  heathenism  having  everywhere  succumbed  before 
the  preaching  of  missionaries,  Christianity  was  made 
the  legal  religion  of  the  island.  The  identity  of  the 
corporate  body  thereupon  "  established  " — the  Church 
of  Theodore  and  Dunstan,  of  Anselm  and  Becket,  of 
Chicheley  and  Wolsey — with  the  society  which  now 
bears  the  name  "  Church  of  England,"  is  a  fact  recog- 
nized by  English  law,^  and  assailed  only  by  those  who 

'  As,  for  instance,  in  such  cases  as  that  cited  by  Dean  Hook  from  the  proceedings 
in  the  Court  of  Queen's  Bench  :  "  A  clergyman  desired  to  establish  his  claim  to 
certain  marriage  fees.  He  would  have  gained  his  suit  if  he  could  have  proved  that 
his  predecessors  in  the  time  of  Pilchard  I.  had  received  the  payment,  and  failing  in 
that  proof  he  was  nonsuited.    The  whole  process  depended  upon  the  sameness  of 

B 


2  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

misconstrue  the  purpose  of  the  Reformation.  It  might, 
therefore,  appear  natural  to  begin  a  history  of  this 
Church  with  an  account  of  the  celebrated  mission  of 
596,  and  to  substantiate  her  pretensions  to  Apostolic 
lineage  by  explaining  what  were  the  credentials  of 
Augustine.  The  truth  is,  however,  that  the  Catholic 
faith,  in  its  connection  with  these  islands,  has  a  history 
centuries  older  than  its  recognition  by  Saxon  legis- 
lature, and  the  consequent  so-called  union  of  Church 
and  State.  Long  before  Augustine's  time  there  existed 
in  these  islands  a  society  which  professed  the  orthodox 
faith,  maintained  the  episcopal  lineage,  and  by  sending 
its  representatives  to  the  great  Councils  asserted  its 
claim  to  be  reckoned  among  the  scions  of  the  Catholic 
Church.  Though  not  initiated  by  this  native  Church, 
the  conversion  of  the  Saxon  invaders  was  successfully 
accomplished  only  by  the  co-operation  of  missionaries 
belonging  thereto.  The  stream  which  connects  us  with 
the  Apostolic  fountain  head  is,  in  fact,  two-headed. 
It  can  be  traced  inferentially  through  the  channel  of  a 
Celtic  episcopate — through  Aidan  and  Columban, — or 
perspicuously  through  Augustine  and  Theodore  and  the 
bishops  accredited  by  Eome.  A  history  of  our  Church 
would,  if  on  this  ground  alone,  be  incomplete  with- 
out an  account  of  Celtic  Christianity. 
Eariytesti-      It   is    probablc   that   before   the    end    of    the    first 

monytoits  .       .  ^     x^i-av 

existence,  ccutury  Britain  had  received  a  knowledge  of  the 
Christian  faith,  and  concurrently  the  then  universal 
Orders   of  ministry.     Soldiers  in  the    Eoman    legions 

the  Church  before  and  after  the  Reformation."— Lives  of  Archbishops,  vol.  vi.  p.  36. 
The  student  may  be  reminded  that  the  now  common  theory  which  would  confound 
the  Church  of  England  with  the  creations  of  Protestantism,  and  assign  its  "  estab- 
lishment •'  to  some  undetermined  date  in  the  reign  of  Henry,  Edward,  or  Elizabeth, 
was  unknown  before  the  Georgian  period,  save  to  unskilful  Roman  controversialists . 
Its  present  prevalence  only  deserves  attention  as  attesting  the  impotence  of  the 
most  substantial  historical  facts  when  arrayed  against  a  theological  prejudice. 


THE  CHURCH  OF  THE   CELTS.  3 

may  have,  even  thus  early,  acted  as  missionaries.  We 
may  also  find  an  evangelizing  agency  in  that  commer- 
cial intercourse  between  Britain  and  the  Continent 
which  received  such  rapid  development  in  the  first 
century.  That  an  organized  mission  to  Britain  had 
been  attempted  is  hardly  probable,  though,  as  will  be 
shown  below,  tradition  teems  with  legends  of  such 
enterprises.  These  legends  are  nevertheless  valuable 
as  proofs  of  the  fact  for  which  they  profess  to  account 
— that  a  Christian  Church  existed  in  Britain  shortly 
after  the  Apostolic  age. 

The  more  general  proofs  of  this  fact  are  the  state- 
ments of  noted  ecclesiastical  writers.  Tertullian  (fl. 
200)  speaks  of  "  those  British  districts  hitherto  inac- 
cessible to  the  Eomans,  but  subjugated  to  Christ."  1 
Justin  Martyr  (d.  cir.  166)  testifies  to  the  prevalence 
of  Christianity  in  "  every "  country  known  to  the 
Eomans.^  In  the  third  century  Origen  states  plainly 
that  "  the  power  of  God  the  Saviour  is  even  with  those 
who  live  in  Britain  and  are  separated  from  our  world." 
He  asks,  "  When  did  Britain  before  the  airival  of 
Christ  assent  to  the  religious  belief  in  One  God  ?  But 
now,  by  reason  of  the  Churches  which  occupy  the  ends 
of  the  world,  the  whole  earth  shouts  with  joy  to  the 
God  of  Israel."  ^  In  the  time  of  Eusebius  (d.  cir.  340) 
the  conversion  of  Britain  in  the  Apostolic  age  appears 
to  have  been  an  accepted  fact : — "  That  some  (of  the 
Apostles)  should  reach  the  extremities  of  the  inhabited 
world,  and  that  others  should  cross  the  ocean  to 
the  isles  called  Britannic,  I  no  longer  think  to  be  the 
work  of  a  mere  man."  ^  To  the  same  effect  writes  Hilary 
(fl.  354) 

'  Adv.  Judseos,  c.  7.  =  Cum  Tryphone  Dial.,  p.  388.    Ed.  Thirlby,  Lond, 

*  Horn.  VI.  in  Lucam.,  p.  939,  iii.  (i'aris,  1740);  and  Horn,  in  Ezek.  p.  370. 

*  Euseb.,  Dem.  Evang.,  lib.  iii.  c.  7,  p.  112. 


4  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

Traditional  There  arose  in  later  years  a  desire  to  trace  British 
Us  origin.  Christianity  to  its  very  fountain  head,  and  if  possible 
connect  it  with  names  eminent  in  Christian  history. 
This  is  a  sufficient  explanation  of  the  more  detailed 
accounts  of  missionary  work  in  Britain  preserved  in 
legends.  Few  of  these  legends  can  be  traced  further 
back  than  the  sixth  century.  Missions  to  Britain  have 
been  attributed — 

(I.)  To  S.  Paul  himself,  who  is  supposed  to  have 
visited  Spain  and  the  British  Islands  in  the  interval 
between  his  two  imprisonments  at  Eome.  It  is  urged 
that  Clemens  Romanus  affirms  that  S.  Paul  "taught 
righteousness  throughout  the  whole  world,  having 
travelled  to  the  utmost  bounds  of  the  West."  ^  The 
testimony  of  Clemens,  S.  Paul's  personal  friend,  is 
doubtless  weighty,  but  it  is  not  plain  that  Britain  is 
the  region  meant.  There  is,  on  the  contrary,  reason  to 
believe  that  to  repfxa  t^s  Svcrews  means  Spain.  Nor  is  the 
statement  of  Theodoret  (d.  458),  that  S.  Paul  "  brought 
salvation  to  the  islands  l^'ing  in  the  ocean "  ^  quite 
perspicuous.  In  fact,  the  theory  that  S.  Paul  was  the 
Apostle  of  Britain,  though  countenanced  by  Usher  and 
Still ingfleet,  is  now  regarded  as  destitute  of  substantial 
foundation,  i^z   H^ fiiin^  •  ioJt  cJuti  t^  dj'-iMtr^Ji 

(II.)  To  other  Apostles  or  persons  mentioned  in  the 
New  Testament.  We  have  shown  above  how  Eusebius 
attests  the  work  of  the  Apostles  in  the  British  I>lands. 
Later  writers  pretend  to  speak  less  vaguely  on  the 
subject,  giving  the  names  of  these  Apostolic  mission- 
aries. Besides  S.  Paul,  the  names  of  S.  Peter,  S.  James 
the  Great,  and  S.  Simon  Zelotes  are  recorded.^     There 

'  Clem.  Eom.  ad  Cor.,  c.  5.  '  In  Tsalm  cxvi.,  torn.  i.  p.  871. 

'    Stillingflcot,  Orig.  Britannicae,   vol.  i. ;  and  cf.  Usher,  De  Primord.,  cap.  i. 
pp.  5-7,  cap.  ii.  p.  12. 


THE   CHURCH  OF  THE   CELTS.  5 

is  also  a  once  popular  legend  concerning  tlie  mission  of 
Joseph  of  Arimathea,^  who  is  said  to  have  come  over 
from  Gaul  at  S.  Philip's  bidding,  bringing  with  him  the 
Holy  Grail,  and  to  have  settled  with  twelve  com- 
panions at  Glastonbury,  then  called  Avalon.  At  the 
Council  of  Basle  and  other  fifteenth-century  Councils, 
where  the  question  of  precedence  was  keenly  discussed 
between  the  representatives  of  the  French  and  English 
Churches,  this  story  was  accepted  as  proof  of  the  greater 
antiquity  of  the  latter.  The  Glastonbury  legends,  how- 
ever, are  not  older  than  the  eleventh  century,  and  the 
mission  of  Joseph  is  doubtless  a  mere  fable.  The 
Welsh  Triads  connect  the  Church  of  Britain  with 
Aristobulus,  whose  household  is  saluted  by  S.  Paul  in 
Rom.  xvi.,  and  who  is  supposed  to  have  been  one  of  the 
seventy  disciples  of  the  Saviour.  Caradoc  or  Caractacus 
is  said  to  have  returned  from  Rome  with  Aristobulus 
in  the  character  of  a  bishop.  Other  New  Testament 
names  are  introduced  in  this  legend :  the  Pudens  and 
Claudia  of  Martial  (lib.  iv.  epigr.  13)  are  the  friends 
Avhom  S.  Paul  mentions  (2  Tim.  iv.  21),  and  are  also 
the  son-in-law  and  daughter  of  Caradoc.  The  legend 
is  not  altogether  worthless,  since  modern  commen- 
tators have  admitted  that  the  British  lady  Claudia, 
whose  marriage  with  Pudens  Martial  celebrates,  may 
really  be  the  Claudia  mentioned  in  conjunction  with 
Pudens  by  S.  Paul.^ 

(III.)  To  the  missionaries  sent  by  Eleutherius  Bishop 
of  Rome  (176-190)  to  the  court  of  Lucius  a  British  king. 
The  simplest  form  of  this  legend  is  in  a  sixth-century 
catalogue  of  Roman  bishops.  To  the  name  Eleutherius 
is  attached  an  interpolation  that  he  "  received  a  letter 

'  Stillingfleet,  Orig.  Brit.,  vol.  i.  pp.  SY-SQ.     Oxf.  1842. 
"  Alfoid,  Commentary,  vol.  iii.,  Proleg.  p.  104. 


6    ^  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

from  Lucius,  King  of  Britain,  asking  that  he  would 
order  steps  to  be  taken  for  making  him  a  Christian." 
This  short  account  is  enlarged  by  Bede,  and  again  by 
the  Book  of  Llandaff  (of  the  eleventh  or  twelfth 
century),  and  the  Welsh  Triads.  According  to  its 
most  embellished  form  Lucius,  or  Lleufer  Mawr,  sends 
two  ambassadors,  named  Elfan  and  Medwy,  to  Pope 
Eleutherius,  desiring  instruction  in  the  Christian  faith. 
Ffagan  and  Dyvan,  two  most  holy  men,  are  deputed  to 
the  work ;  the  king  and  his  people  are  baptized,  the 
heathen  temples  re-dedicated,  and  an  episcopate  is 
established,  with  archbishoprics  at  London,  York,  and 
Caerleon-on-Usk. 
Perhaps  an       Without  denying  altogether  the  operation  of  other 

offslioot  of  .  .       .  ... 

the  Church  and  earlier  missionary  agencies,  it  is  reasonable  to  sup- 
pose that,  as  regards  Orders  and  organization  at  least,  the 
British  Church  owed  much  to  the  Church  of  Gaul.  At 
Lyons  and  Vienne  Christian  Churches  were  flourishing 
as  early  as  a.d.  150.  The  subsequent  relations  of  the 
British  to  the  Galilean  Church  suggest  that  the  former 
looked  upon  the  latter  as  the  mother  Church.  "  Under 
the  influence  of  this  connection  it  was  but  natural  that 
the  British  Church  should  follow  the  judgment  of  that 
of  Gaul,  (i.)  in  condemning  the  Donatists  at  the  Council 
of  Aries  :  (ii.)  in  fully  approving,  although  with  a  tem- 
porary hesitation  about  the  orthodoxy  of  the  term 
o/xoowtos,  of  the  Nicene  condemnation  of  Arianism  :  and 
(iii.)  in  adopting  for  the  observance  of  Easter  the  eighty- 
four  years'  cycle  of  Sulpicius  Severus.  To  the  influence 
of  their  mutual  affection  .  .  .  should  be  attributed  the 
great  intercourse  between  the  Galilean  and  British 
Churches  in  the  fourth  and  fifth  centuries.  S.  Martin 
of  Tours,  S.  Germanus,  S.  Lupus,  S.  Severus  are  some 
of  the  Galilean   bishops  whose   sympathy  and   active 


THE   CHURCH  OF  THE   CELTS.  7 

assistance  never  failed  the  Cliurch  in  Britain.  Chnrclies 
dedicated  in  their  names  indicate  the  honour  in  which 
British  Christians  filially  treasured  up  their  memory."  ^ 

With  the  dawn  of  the  fourth  century  British  Chris-  The  Britisii 
tianity  passes  from  the  region  of  conjecture  and  doubtful  J^g  tenth 
legend  to  that  of  history.  There  is  no  reason  to  doubt  J^q^®''^" 
that  in  the  great  persecution  of  303  Britain  was  the 
scene  of  martj^rdoms.  It  is  true  that  Lactantius  writes 
that  in  these  Western  provinces  the  leniency  of  Con- 
stantius  considerably  abated  the  violence  of  the  attack. 
In  those  regions,  he  says,  Constantius  only  so  far  carried 
out  the  commands  of  his  superiors  that  though  the 
churches — the  perishable  walls  of  Christianity — were 
frequently  demolished,  "  that  true  temple  of  God  which 
is  in  the  human  body  he  preserved  in  safety."  ^  This 
testimony,  however,  does  not  preclude  occasional  out- 
breaks of  violence  against  the  persons  of  Christians, 
especially  such  as  were  serving  in  the  Eoman  legions. 
What  Gildas,  the  sixth-century  historian,  records  with 
reference  to  the  martyrdoms  of  Alban  at  Verulamium, 
Aaron  and  Julius  at  Caerleon-on-Usk,  "  and  others  of 
both  sexes  at  divers  places,"  ^  is  therefore  not  incredible. 
In  Bede  the  legend  is  so  encumbered  with  supernatural 
accretions  that  it  is  difficult  to  distinguish  fiction  and 
fact.*  Alban,  a  pagan,  shelters  a  fugitive  Christian 
cleric,  is  converted,  and  surrenders  himself  to  suffer  in 
the  stead  of  his  guest.  The  stream  divides  that  he  may 
pass  through  it  to  the  place  of  martyrdom;  a  fountain 
gushes  from  the  ground  in  answer  to  his  last  prayer. 
Such  was  the  form  of  the  story  in  the  eighth  century.    In 

'  John  Pryce,  Ancient  British  Church,  pp.  59,  60 — a  work  to  which  we  are  in- 
debted for  much  valuable  information,  and  which  we  recommend  to  such  students 
as  desire  a  lively  but  sufficiently  exliaustive  treatment  of  an  interesting  subject. 

^  Lactantius,  De  Mort.  Persec,  xv.,  xvi. 

^  Hist.  viii.  (M.  H.  B.  8).  *  Bseda,  Eccl.  Hist.,  i.  18. 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


British 
delegates 
at  the 
Church 
Councils. 


the  later  historians  it  appears  with  additional  miraculous 
embellishments.  In  Britain,  as  elsewhere,  the  persecu- 
tion must  have  ceased  with  the  death  of  Diocletian  in 
305.  Soon  the  conversion  and  military  successes  of 
Constantino  had  secured  for  all  branches  of  the  Church 
external  peace,  and  the  age  of  persecution  gave  place  to 
the  age  of  controversy  and  (Ecumenical  Councils. 

British  Christianity  now  more  plainly  asserts  it- 
self. At  the  Council  of  Aries  (314),  where  the  dispute 
was  settled  between  Caecilian  of  Carthage  and  the 
schismatic  Donatists,  British  bishops  attended  and 
affixed  their  signatures.  According  to  the  Corbey  manu- 
script (to  which  Haddon  and  Stubbs  give  the  preference), 
five  British  ecclesiastics  were  present  ^ — three  bishops,  a 
priest,  and  a  deacon.  York,  London,  and  Caerleon  appear 
to  have  been  the  sees  of  the  episcopal  representatives. 
The  language  of  Athanasius  seems  to  indicate  that 
British  bishops  were  personally  present  at  the  great 
Council  of  Nicesa  (325).  In  the  existent  list  of  subscrip- 
tions their  names  do  not  appear.  There  is,  however, 
reason  to  believe  that  this  list  is  defective.  So  too,  in 
the  case  of  the  Council  of  Sardica  (347),  which  acquitted 
Athanasius,  and  which  gave  the  Eoman  bishop  the 
special  power  of  ordering  courts  of  appeal  for  rehearing 
causes,  it  is  not  plain  whether  the  British  episcopate 
was  personally  represented  or  only  expressed  subsequent 
concurrence.  At  Ariminum  (359)  a  large  number  of 
British  bishops  were  present,  and  with  the  other  repre- 
sentatives, were  persuaded  to  accept  the  plausible  creed 
of  the  seini-Arians,  which  avoided  the  term  6/^oo7;crtos.^ 
But  that  throughout  the  controversy  the  British  Church 
was  on  the  side  of  the  orthodox  party  is  sufficiently 

'  Haddon  and  Stubbs,  Concilia,  7. 

=■  Cf.  Apolog.  Contra  Arianos;  Migne,  Series  GrsEca,  torn.  xxv.  col.  249. 


THE   CHURCH  OF  THE   CELTS.  9 

plain  from  the  words  of  Athanasius.  Its  attitude  in 
this  great  conflict  elicited  also  the  encomiums  of  Hilary, 
who  congratulates  "  his  co-bishops  of  Germany  .  .  . 
and  of  the  British  provinces  that  they  stood  firmly, 
uncontaminated  and  uninjured  by  all  the  contagion  of 
the  detestable  heresy."^ 

To  the  seductions  of  another  "  detestable  heresy "  British 
the  British  Church  was  more  amenable.  Pelagianism 
was  a  system  which  explained  the  paradox  of  man's  free 
will  and  God's  predestination  in  such  a  way  as  appa- 
rently to  repudiate  the  doctrine  of  original  sin.  The 
Pelagians,  if  their  antagonists  do  not  misrepresent 
them,  taught  that  the  sin  of  Adam  affected  him  only, 
and  not  all  mankind ;  that  man  can  of  his  own  free 
will  choose  good  as  well  as  evil,  and  so  secure  a  certain 
degree  of  future  happiness  apart  from  Christianity ; 
that  the  divine  grace  of  which  Christianity  tells  is 
communicated  by  the  influence  of  Christ's  teaching  and 
example ;  that  the  first  beginning  of  renewal  lies  with 
the  man  himself,  and  that  predestination  is  merely  God's 
foreknowledge  of  human  actions.  Pelagius  was  a 
Briton  of  great  personal  holiness  ;  his  active  disciple, 
Celestius,  appears  to  have  been  an  Irishman.^  Pelagian- 
ism was  condemned  at  Councils  held  at  Carthage,  412  ; 
Ephesus,  431 ;   and  Orange,  529. 

Though  its   two   authors    contracted   their  peculiar  The  mis- 
opinions    abroad — perhaps    from  Euffinus    at    Rome —  Germanus. 
yet  it  was  in  Britain  that  Pelagianism  found  widest 
acceptance.    Its  prevalence  was  the  cause  of  the  mission 
of  S.  Germanus.     His  biographer,  Constantius,  relates  ^ 
that  the  British  ecclesiastics,  perplexed  by  the  spread 

'  Hilary,  De  Synodis,  Proleg.  et  §  2. 

*  Augustin,  Epist.  186,  cap.  i. ;  Neander,  Ch.  Hist.,  vol.  iv.  p.  313. 

^  Vita  S.  Germani,  lib.  i.  cap.  v. 


lo  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

of  Pelagianism,  invited  the  assistance  of  learned  Galli- 
can  divines,  and  that  a  synod  deputed  Germanns  Bishop 
of  Aiixerre  and  Lupus  Bishop  of  Troyes  to  cross  over 
to   Britain.     According   to   another    account/   it    vv^as 
Pope  Coelestine  who  authorized  the   mission  of   Ger- 
manus.     The  Gallican  ecclesiastics  landed  in  Britain 
in  429.    They  proceeded  to  preach,  not  only  in  churches, 
but  throughout  the  open  country,  and  were  successful 
in  reclaiming  those  who   had  been  led  astray.     The 
Pelagian  teachers  ventured  to  face  them  in  a  public 
disputation,  only  to  be  confuted  shamefully.    Germanus 
did  not  quit  this  land  before  he  had  attained  a  triumph 
with  more  carnal  weapons.     The  Picts  attempted  to 
beset  a  Christian  congregation  who  were    celebrating 
Easter  in  the  Yale  of  Mold,  in  Flintshire.     Germanus 
succeeded  in  striking  the  enemy  with  panic  by  setting 
a  corps  in  ambush,  who,  at  a  given  signal,  charged  with 
cries  of  "  Hallelujah !  "     This  event  is   known  as  the 
Hallelujah   victory.     Germanus   is   said  to  have   paid 
Britain  a  second  visit  in  447,  with  Severus,  Archbishop 
of  Treves.      A   doubtful   legend  ascribes   to   him  the 
monastic  institutions  at  Llancarvan  and  Llanilltyd,  and 
relates  that  he  appointed  Illtud  to  be  the  head,  and 
Lupus  to  be  the  bishop,  of  the  latter  college.     Eemem. 
bering  that  it  was  lack  of  theological  learning  in  the 
British  ecclesiastics  which  necessitated  his  visits,  we 
may  think  it  possible  that  he  suggested  the  establish- 
ment   of    such    seminaries,    though    Llancarvan    and 
Llanilltyd  were  probably  founded  at  a  later  date.     An 
ancient  manuscript  records  that  Germanus  introduced 
into  Britain    the  "  ordinem  cursus   Gallorum,"  which 
we  may  perhaps  identify  with  that  Gallican  liturgy 
which  Augustine  found  in  use  in  the  British  Church. 

'  Prosper  Aquitanus,  Cbron.  bub  anno  433. 


THE   CHURCH  OF   THE   CELTS.  ii 

How  extensive  was  the  influence  of  Germanus  in  the 
west  of  the  island  is  attested  by  the  still  surviving 
churches  dedicated  to  the  Galilean  missionary  at  S. 
Harmon,  Bettws  Garmon,  and  the  several  Llanarmons. 
Pelagianism  was  probably  quite  exterminated  by  Ger- 
manus. The  tradition  which  records  its  subsequent 
condemnation  at  the  synods  of  Llanddewi-Brefi  and 
Lucus  Victorise  in  the  middle  of  the  sixth  century  is 
of  no  value,  though  the  synods  themselves  may  be 
regarded  as  historical. 

The  mission  of  Patrick  to  Ireland  was  contem-  PaiiacUus 
poraneous  with  that  of  Germanus  to  Britain.  In  the  Patrick  in 
legend  which  makes  Pope  Coelestine  authorize  the  ■'■'^®^^^^- 
journey  of  Germanus  there  is  possibly  a  confusion  of 
the  two  incidents.  Christianity  appears  to  have  been 
planted  early  in  the  sister  island,  but  hitherto  had 
borne  little  fruit.  Jerome,  at  the  end  of  the  fourth 
century,  describes  the  contemporary  Irish  as  idolaters, 
who  fed  on  human  flesh  and  acknowledged  no  restraint 
in  sexual  intercourse.  To  this  unpromising  field  of 
labour  Coelestine  sent  a  monk  of  Brittany,  named 
Palladius,^  as  a  missionary  bishop,  much  in  the  same 
way  as  Gregory,  a  century  later,  sent  Augustine  to 
Britain.  Palladius,  it  is  said,  built  some  churches  in 
Wicklow,  but  failed  to  win  many  converts.  Sailing 
round  the  coast  northward,  he  was  driven  by  a  storm 
to  the  Scotch  coast.  His  subsequent  fate  is  uncertain. 
Patrick  undertook  the  mission  which  had  thus  proved 
abortive,  cir.  430,  and  his  success  was  testified  to  by 
an  Irish  proverb,  "Not  to  Palladius  but  to  Patrick." ^ 

'  Prosper.  Chron.  ad  Ann.  435:  "Ad  Scotos  in  Christum  credentes  .  .  . 
primus  episcopus  mittitur."  This  probably  implies  that  some  Christianity  had 
survived  in  Ireland.  But  it  is  obvious  from  the  sequel  that  Palladius  was  really 
sent  as  a  missionary  rather  than  an  overseer. 

*  Sexta,  Vit,  S.  Patricii  ap.  Colgan,  Trias  Thaum.  70. 


12  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

Again  the  name  of  Coelestine  is  introduced.  We  are 
told  that  the  missionary's  baptismal  name  was  Suchar, 
and  that  he  was  a  Breton,  the  son  of  Calphurnius  and 
Conche,  S.  Martin's  sister.  Educated  by  S.  Martin  and 
Germanus  of  Aiixerre,  he  was  deputed  by  Coelestine  to 
act  as  "Archiepiscopus  Scotorum,"  under  the  new  title 
Patricius.  The  accounts  of  Patrick's  missionary  labours 
are  full  of  miracles.  It  appears  credible  that  he  did 
much,  in  conjunction  with  a  corps  of  British  monks, 
to  exteiminate  idolatry.  That  he  established  an  eccle- 
siastical organization,  instituted  canons,  and  made 
Armagh  the  metropolitan  city  of  several  bishoprics, 
may  perhaps  be  only  a  flattering  legend. 
The  Welsh  At  all  cvcnts  the  work  of  Patrick  was  not  des- 
to  Ireland,  tilled  to  survive.  The  traditionary  date  of  the  mission- 
ary's death  is  493.  Before  550  the  Christianity  of 
Iieland  had  so  suffered  from  apostacy  that  "  all,  from 
the  highest  to  the  lowest,  had  cast  aside  the  Catholic 
faith,"  ^  and  the  saints  of  Wales  were  implored  to 
undertake  the  third  mission  to  Ireland.  Making  allow- 
ance for  the  partiality  of  the  British  annalists  and 
biographers,  we  may  yet  believe  that  no  light  duties 
were  demanded  of  Gildas  and  his  fellow-labourers,  and 
that  the  subsequent  prosperity  of  the  Irish  Church  was 
due  to  their  exertions.  Certain  it  is  that  henceforward 
Ireland  was  noted  as  a  great  centre  of  Christian  culture 
and  missionary  enterprise. 
Irish  and  A\  hat  David,  Cadoc,  and  Gildas  had  done  for  Ire- 
sions  to°^'^  land  the  next  generation  of  West  British  saints  did  for 
Scotland.  Southern  Scotland.  The  Irish  mission  of  Columban, 
entering  Scotland  from  the  west,  fell  in  with  the  repre- 
sentatives of  the  older  Church, — the  Welsh  missionary 
band,    headed    first    by   Ninian,    then    by    Kentigern. 

'  Vita  S.  Gildffi,  xi.,  xii. ;  Mabill,  Actt.  SS.  Benedict.,  i.  138. 


THE   CHURCH  OF  THE   CELTS.  13 

The  two  parties  laboured  among  the  Picts  in  harmony 
and  frequent  interchange  of  good  offices.  On  the  island 
of  Hy,  or  lona,  which  was  given  him  by  one  of 
the  native  chieftains,  Columban  established  a  monastic 
college,  which  became  an  important  missionary 
station.  A  cathedral  church  of  white  stone,  dedicated 
to  S.  Martin,  gave  to  the  promontory  in  Galloway  the 
name  Whithern.  In  at  least  sixty-three  districts, 
according  to  Bishop  Forbes,^  the  nomenclature  of 
churches  attests  the  popularity  of  the  Welsh  missionary. 
It  will  be  shown  in  the  next  chapter  what  an  im- 
portant influence  these  Christian  stations  in  the  north 
were  destined  to  exercise  on  the  history  of  our  Church. 

Such  is  the  account  of  Christianity  in  West  Britain  Decadence 
in  the  sixth  century.     Its  external  activity  was  making  church m 
the    sister    island    a    veritable    insula    sanctorum,    and      ^^  ^^ 
establishing  the  Christian  religion  among  the  savage 
Picts  of  Scotland.     Its  internal  prosperity  was  attested 
by  the  rise  of  monasteries  and  educational  seminaries, 
and  by  the  substitution  of  parochial  churches  for  the 
earlier  preaching  stations. 

Very  different  was  the  state  of  that  part  of  the  island 
which  we  now  distinguish  as  England.  From  the 
middle  of  the  fifth  century  there  had  swept  upon  the 
eastern  coast  continuous  waves  of  invasion.  Year 
after  year  had  witnessed  the  advance  of  Saxons,  Angles, 
and  Jutes  towards  the  heart  of  Britain,  and  where  these 
barbarous  hordes  had  settled  every  trace  of  Christianity 
was  effaced.  The  natives,  incapacitated  for  resistance 
by  disunion,  were  slaughtered  by  thousands  on  the  field 
of  battle.  The  survivors  pressed  farther  and  farther 
westward,  till  safety  was  at  last  attained  in  the  moun- 
tain fastnesses  and  tangled  forests  of  Wales  and  Devon- 

'  Kalendars  of  Scottish  Saints,  p.  424. 


14  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

shire,  where  the  pagans  dared  not  penetrate.     In  this 
western   region,   therefore,   was   all   that  remained  of 
British  Christianity.     Elsewhere  the  worship  of  Thor 
and   Odin   had   utterly  exterminated   the   religion   of 
Christ.      "  The    cities    went    to    ruins :    Christianity 
became  extinct,  and  all  culture  with  it.     There  were 
Btill  Eoman  roads  leading  to  the  walls  and  towers  of 
empty  cities;   the  Eoman  divisions   of  the  land  were 
conspicuous ;  the  intrenched  and  fortified  camps ;   the 
great   villas   of  the   princely   families;    churches   and 
burial-places :  but  they  were  become  before  the  days 
of  Bede  mere  haunted  ruins,  something  like  the  mys- 
terious fabrics  which  in  Central  America  tell  of  the 
rule  of  a  mighty  race  whose  name  is  forgotten."  ^     This 
effacement  of  Christianity  may  be  considered  to  have 
been  completed  in  586,  when  the  last  surviving  bit-hops, 
Theonas  of  London  and  Thadiocus  of  York,  are  said  to 
have  joined  their  fugitive  compatriots  in  their  western 
asylum. 
Severance        That  WO    havc    no  rccord  of   attempts   to    convert 
saxons.^'^    thesc   savage   tribes    on   the   part   of  the   vanquished 
Britons  scarcely  requires  comment.     Mutual  animosity, 
engendered   by   years   of  bloodj^   conflict,  is    scarcely 
conducive  to   the  propagation   of  the  gospel  of  peace. 
In  later  times,  when  the  hard  tempers  of  the  northern 
freebooters   had   encountered    the    gracious   influences 
of  Christianity,  the  converts  of  Augustine  and  Aidan 
maintained  towards  their  British  brethren  all  the  hatred 
of  the  wrongdoer  to  his  victims.     The  boundary  line 
which   divided  the  two   races   was  Offa's   Dyke.      In 
the  eighth  century,   the  Welshman  who  crossed  this 
boundary  was  liable  to  mutilation.     Laws  almost  as 
barbarous  were  passed  by  subsequent   generations  of 

'  Stubbs,  Const.  Hist.,  vol.  i.  p.  61. 


THE   CHURCH  OF  THE  CELTS.  15 

Saxon  princes.  That  there  was  a  correspondent  ill 
will  on  the  part  of  the  vanquished  race  is  more  than 
probable.  There  may  be  a  substratum  of  authenticity 
in  the  reply  which  the  Abbot  of  Bangor  is  represented 
as  making  to  Augustine :  "  No,  we  will  not  preach 
the  faith  to  the  cruel  race  of  strangers  who  have 
treacherously  driven  our  ancestors  from  their  country 
and  robbed  their  posterity  of  their  heritage."  ^ 

It    will  be    shown    in    the    next    chapter    that  the  The  subse- 
conversion  of  Saxon  England  was  effected  by  native  giin^^^m 
Christians  as  much  as  by  foreign  missionaries.     But  Scotland, 
these   representatives   of    Celtic    Christianity   did  not 
come  from  West  Britain,  but  from  Scotland.     It  was 
not  directly  from  the  parent  stem,  but  from  its  scion — 
from    those    Northern      settlements     which     through 
Columban  no  less  than  through  Ninian,  can  be  traced 
back  to  the  saints  of  Wales — that  the  English  Chris- 
tianity of  the  seventh  century  derived  life  and  vigour. 

We    close    this    chapter    with    an    account    of   the  pecuiiari- 
most  striking  features  in  the  organization  and  disci-  ceftic 
plirie  of  the  native  Church.     We  premise  that  the  close  <^^^'=^- 
relationship  of  Irish  and  North  British  Christianity  to 
the  Christianity  of  West  Britain  had  effected  a  general 
uniformity  in  such  matters  in   the.   seventh  century, 
and  that  "  outside  the  Eoman  and  Augustinian  circle 
of  ideas  there    was    substantially  throughout  Britain 
perfect   uniformity   on   all   points   relating   to    divine 
worship  and  ecclesiastical  discipline."  ^ 

One    notable  feature    in  the  British  system   is  the  Dispropor- 
seemingly    disproportionate    size    of    the    episcopate,  numb^erof 
The  diocesan  system  was  very  imperfect  at  this  time  :  bishops, 
there  is  reason  to  believe  that  when  the  Eoraans  quitted 
Britain  Caerleon  was  the  only  see  in  Wales.    Yet,  barely 

'  Brut.  Tysilio  in  Myfyr.  Archasology  vol.  ii.  365. 
2  Pryce,  Ancient  British  Church, 


i6  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

a  century  later,  119  bishops  attended  the  synod  of 
Llanddewi-Brefi,  and  a  century  earlier  the  language 
of  Athanasius  and  Hilary  suggests  that  the  number  of 
British  bishops  at  the  time  of  the  Arian  controversy 
was  disproportionately  large.  The  existence  of  an 
order  of  monastic  bishops  explains  the  apparent  ano- 
maly. Both  in  Ireland  and  Wales  a  resident  bishop 
appears  to  have  been  considered  essential  to  the  right 
governing  of  a  monastery.  Sometimes  such  bishops 
were  abbots ;  usually,  however,  they  were  subordinate 
members  of  the  religious  house,  exercising  no  other 
functions  but  those  connected  with  the  transmission 
of  the  priestly  office.  In  some  cases  bishops  lived 
together  in  colleges,  which  were  probably  centres  of 
missionary  enterprise.  Many  such  episcopal  csenobia 
of  seven  members  are  enumerated  in  Ireland,  and  in 
Wales  an  establishment  of  seven  bishops  is  associated 
with  the  name  of  S.  David. 
Numerous  Ncxt  to  this  extension  of  the  episcopal  order,  and 
as  a  consequence  of  it,  we  are  called  upon  to  notice 
the  development  of  the  monastic  system.  Wales  and 
Ireland  were  both  covered  with  a  network  of  religious 
houses,  and  the  constant  ebb  and  flow  of  missionaries 
between  Wales,  Cornwall,  Ireland,  and  North  Britain 
finds  explanation  in  this  prevalent  monasticism,  in- 
volving as  it  did  celibacy  and  freedom  from  domestic 
ties.  To  what  an  extent  monasticism  was  sometimes 
developed  we  gather  from  the  account  of  Bangor 
Iscoed,  the  great  establishment  on  the  Dee.  This 
monastery  attained  the  proportions  of  a  modern  uni- 
versity. It  was  divided  into  seven  parts,  and  each 
part  contained  no  fewer  than  seven  hundred  men.  It 
may  be  no  exaggeration  that  when  the  praying  monks 
of  Bangor  were  put  to  the  sword  by  jiEthel  frith  the 
Northumbrian,  there  were  twelve  hundred  victims. 


monas 
teries. 


THE   CHURCH  OF  THE  CELTS.  17 

It  will  be  shown  in  tlie  next  chapter  that  the  native 
Church  had  certain  peculiarities  of  usage  which  they 
were  unwilling  to  adapt  to  the  Roman  system  advocated 
by  Augustine.  We  here  notice' the  most  conspicuous 
points  of  difference. 

(I.)  The  time  for  the  observance  of  Easter.  Pecuiiari- 

This  deviation  from  Eoman  usage  was  really  the  putaSon™' 
relic  of  an  earlier  controversy  of  considerable  import-  of  faster. 
ance.  The  original  ground  of  dispute  was  that  the 
Christians  of  Asia  Minor  commemorated  the  Saviour's 
death  and  Resurrection  contemporaneously  with  the 
Jewish  Passover :  i.e.  the  three  sacred  days  began  with 
the  fourteenth  moon  of  the  first  lunation  after  the 
spring  equinox,  without  reference  to  the  day  of  the 
week.  They  were  on  this  account  called  quarto-de- 
cimani.  The  Western  Churches,  on  the  other  hand, 
followed  by  the  Churches  of  Jerusalem,  Antioch,  and 
Alexandria,  observed  Good  Friday  on  this  fourteenth 
day  of  "  Nisan,"  if  it  fell  on  a  Friday;  if  not,  on  the 
next  Friday.  The  following  Sunday  was  their  Easter 
Day,  The  Church  of  Rome  was  particularly  hostile 
to  the  quarto-deciman  practice,  and  Pope  Victor  (cir. 
200)  went  the  length  of  excommunicating  the  Asiatic 
Churches.  At  the  Councils  of  Aries  and  Nicaea  the 
AVestern  usage  gained  the  day.  It  was  ruled  that 
Easter  Day  should  always  be  a  Sunday,  and  this 
Sunday  was  to  be  that  which  followed  the  first  full 
moon  which  fell  on  or  after  the  vernal  equinox.  Even 
now  conformity  was  not  established.  The  new  source 
of  discord  was  the  reformed  calendar,  based  on  the  dis- 
covery of  the  Metonic  cycle  of  nineteen  years.  The 
new  system  of  computation  was  adopted  by  the  Church 
of  Alexandria,  but  the  Roman  Church  until  525  cluns: 
to  the  Jewish  calendar  with  its  cycle  of  eighty-four 

c 


i8  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

years.    In  the  years  475,  495,  496,  499,  and  516,  Easter 
Day  was  consequently  eight  days  later  in  the  West  than 
in  the  East.     The  peculiarity  of  the  British  Christians 
was  not^  connected  with  the  quarto-deciman  practice, 
but  with  a  retention  of  the  eighty-four  years  cycle. 
Isolated  from  the  Continent  when  the  Western  Churches 
accepted  the  reformed  calendar,  they  had  continued  to 
compute  Easter  as  Eome  had  computed  it  until  525.    A 
minor  peculiarity  existed,  it  seems,  in  their  placing  the 
equinox  on  the  25th  of  March.     But  the  ancient  quarto- 
deciman  use  does  not  bear  directly  onHhe  question,  save 
so  far  as  it  interprets  the  unfair  insinuation  of  some 
Saxon    writers,    that     the    British    Christians    were 
"  Judaic  "  in  their  observance  of  Easter. 
In  Baptism.      (H*)  The  administration  of  Baptism.    Augustine,  at 
the  last  conference  with  the  British  bishops,  made  the 
demand  "  ut  ministerium  baptizandi  .  .  .  juxta  morem 
sanctae  Eomanse  et  Apostolicse   ecclesiae  compleatis."  ^ 
It  is  not  known  to  what  peculiarity  in  the  British 
office   this  requisition  points.     That  the  Britons  neg- 
lected either  the  chrism  or  Confirmation  is  not  probable, 
for   both   were   in    use   in    the    kindred   Irish   body. 
Some    suppose    that    the   trine   immersion    customary 
elsewhere  had  not  been  a  part  of  the  British  ritual. 
Dr.  Lingard,  explaining  the  complementum  haptismi  as 
confirmation,    suggests   that   Augustine    desired    con- 
formity with  the  Eoman   rule  that  persons   baptized 
on  the  eves  of  the  greater  festivals  should  be  at  once 
brought  before  the  bishop  for  Confirmation.^ 
The  ton-  (III.)  The  tonsure.     "  The  British  Church,  differing 

both  from  the  Greek  and  the  Eoman,  shaved  the  head 
jn  an  imperfect  manner,  '  ab  aure  ad  aurem,'  across  the 

'  See  Bfeda,  Hist.  Eccl.,  iii,  11,  and  iii.  3,  25,  28  ;  and  v.  21.  =  Ibid.,  11.  2. 

*  Anglo-Saxon  Church,  vol.  1.  p.  69,  n. 


sure 


THE   CHURCH  OF  THE   CELTS.  19 

front  of  the  head,  but  leaving  the  occiput  untouched."  ^ 
The  Greek  or  Pauline  tonsure  included  the  whole  head ; 
the  Roman  or  Petrine  use  was  to  shave  the  crown, 
leaving  a  circle  of  hair,  which  was  supposed  to  represent 
the  crown  of  thorns.  The  tonsure  was  one  of  the 
burning  questions  which  were  discussed  at  the  Council 
of  Whitby. 

(IV.)  The   consecration   of  bishops.     In  the  Celtic  Andconse- 
Churches  a  single  bishop  was  considered  sufficient  to  bishops, 
perform  the  act  of  consecration.^ 

At  the  Council  of  Whitby  papal  authority  was  held 
to  be  sufficient  to  set  aside  local  usage.  The  Roman 
Easter  was  accepted  in  North  Wales  in  760,  at  the 
instance  of  Elfod,  Bishop  of  Bangor ;  in  South  Wales 
the  continued  divergence  of  custom  provoked  an  English 
invasion  about  this  time.  A  bishop  named  Cyfelach  w^as 
slain,  but  victory  rested  with  the  Welsh.  A  few  years 
later,  South  Wales  accejDted  the  Roman  use. 

'  Pryce,  Ancient  British  Church,  p.  208. 

2  Vita  S.  Kentigern  in  Pinkerton,  Vitte  SS.  Scot.,  p.  223. 


20  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


CHAPTER  II. 

^onbrnion  of  tjbe  ^nglo=^axon0. 

A.D.  596-664. 

Gregory  proposes  to  convert  England — Mission  of  Augustine — Its  success  in 
Kent — Gtregory's  extensive  plan  of  organization — How  is  Augustine  to  deal 
with  the  Celtic  Church  ? — Gregory's  instructions — Conference  with  its  representa- 
tives— Augustine's  ultimatum — The  rupture — Augustine's  work  overrated — 
Kent  and  Essex  relapse — Temporary  success  of  Paulinus  in  Northumbria — In- 
tervention of  missionaries  from  Scotland — Collision  between  the  two  systems — 
Council  of  Whitby. 

Gregory  At  tlie  end  of  the  sixth  century  the  Teuton  hordes 
convert  had  secured  almost  all  England  south  of  the  Tweed 
and  east  of  the  Dee  and  Severn.  Civilized  only  in 
their  elaborate  constitutional  organization,  the  sub- 
jects of  the  Heptarchy  showed  their  peculiarly  brutal 
instincts  in  their  religion.  Their  god  Woden  was  pro- 
pitiated by  human  sacrifices.  Unhallowed  love  was 
typified  by  the  deity  Ereyr.  Their  Valhalla  was 
an  intensity  of  debauchery  and  bloodshed.  Traffic  in 
slaves  was  pushed  by  these  Anglo-Saxons  to  an  extent 
imknown  among  other  nations,  for  it  was  their  common 
practice  to  sell  their  compatriots,  and  even  their  nearest 
relations,  to  the  continental  merchants.  Indirectly 
this  inhuman  usage  is  connected  with  the  first  recorded 
mission  to  Anglo-Saxon  England.  Some  fair-haired 
Yorkshire  lads  in  the  Roman  slave-market  attracted 
the  notice  of  Gregory,  the  ascetic  founder  and  abbot 
of  S.  Andrew's  Monastery  on  Mount  Ca^lius.  The 
dialogue  that  ensued  was  seasoned  by  Gregory  with 


CONVERSION  OF   THE  ANGLO-SAXONS.      21 

comments  of  characteristic  humour.  "  These  Angles,"  he 
said,  "  must  become  angels ;  their  province  Deira  must 
be  rescued  de  ira  Dei ;  their  king  Ella  shall  have 
Alleluia  sung  in  his  dominions."  ^  The  purpose  thus 
quaintly  expressed  took  deep  root  in  his  mind,  and 
was  put  in  execution  some  years  afterwards,  when  the 
Abbot  of  S.  Andrew's  was  known  to  all  Christendom 
as  Pope  Gregory  the  Great.  Before  this,  he  had 
himself  set  out  on  a  mission  to  the  western  islands, 
but  was  forced  to  return,  in  obedience  to  Pope  Bene- 
dict's peremptory  summons,  ere  he  had  gone  three  days' 
journey.^  As  Pope,  at  a  time  when  he  was  harassed 
by  the  combined  anxieties  of  a  famine,  a  schism,  and 
a  threatened  invasion,  Gregory  could  spare  symjDathy 
for  the  Anglo-Saxon  heathens.  A  mission  was  en- 
trusted to  his  own  establishment  on  Mount  Caelius. 
Its  prior,  Augustine,  a  tall  swarthy  monk,  whose  some- 
what arrogant  demeanour  was  not  condoned  by  talents 
of  any  importance,  becomes  henceforth  the  central 
figure  in  the  story.  Augustine's  missionary  band  con- 
sisted of  forty  monks,  lay  and  cleric.  With  these  he 
journeyed  into  Gaul,  intending  to  take  ship  thence 
for  England. 

The  mission  was  altogether  devoid  of  that  enthu- Mission  of 
siastic  zeal  which  animated  its  author.  Tales  were  told  AJ?^^9a  ^ 
in  southern  Gaul  of  the  ferocity  and  barbarous  practices 
of  the  English :  ^  these  soon  brought  Augustine  back 
to  Eome  with  a  prayer  that  the  enterprise  might  be 
abandoned.  This  Gregory  would  not  hear  of.  By 
letters  to  the  Frankish  princes  and  prelates  he  secured 
for  Augustine's  mission  protection  on  its  journey  through 
Gaul,  and  a  sufficient  contingent  of  ambassadors  and 

'  Bseda,  Hist.  Eccl.,  ii.  2.  ^  Joan.  Diac,  Vita  S.  Gregor.,  lib.  i.  22,  23. 

*  Gotselinus,  Hist.  Maj.,  i.  6. 


22  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

CHAP,  interpreters  to  facilitate  its  work  in  England.  So 
^_^1_  aided,  the  missionaries  reached  the  coast  of  Kent, 
landing  on  the  very  spot  which  had  witnessed  the 
arrival  of  the  race  they  came  to  evangelize. 
Its  success  The  King  of  Kent  was  the  powerful  Ethelbert.  His 
wife  was  Bertha,  daughter  of  Charibert  King  of  the 
Franks  of  Paris,  and  a  Christian — a  circumstance 
which  augured  well  for  the  success  of  the  mission.  It 
had  been  stipulated  that  she  should  be  allowed  the 
free  exercise  of  her  religion,  and  Luidhard,  Bishop 
of  Senlis,  had  been  sent  with  her  to  England.  The 
mission  had,  in  fact,  lighted  on  the  one  spot  of  Saxon 
England  where  Christianity  was  known  and  tolerated. 
Ethelbert  appointed  a  day  for  an  interview  with  his 
visitors,  who  were  to  meet  him  in  the  open  air  that  he 
might  not  be  duped  by  elaborate  magical  contrivances. 
At  the  time  appointed  the  missionaries  appeared  before 
the  king  in  a  solemn  religious  procession.  Before 
Augustine  was  carried  a  cross ;  after  him  a  picture  of 
our  Saviour  painted  on  a  board ;  the  brethren  who 
followed  sang  to  the  lately  revived  Gregorian  chants  a 
litany  for  the  salvation  of  their  heathen  hearers.  To  the 
interpreters  who  communicated  Augustine's  discourse 
Ethelbert  gave  an  attentive  hearing.  The  perilous 
enterprise  was  regarded  as  a  proof  of  sincere  purpose. 
The  missionaries  received  a  gracious  reply,  tempered 
with  politic  caution ;  they  were  allowed  to  reside  at 
Canterbury,  and  the  old  Church  of  S.  Martin's  still 
marks  the  spot  where  stood  the  edifice  assigned  for 
their  use.^  To  their  preaching,  their  ascetic  manner 
of  life,  and  their  reputed  miracles  Bede  attributes  their 
subsequent  successes.  On  Whit-Sunday,  597,  Ethelbert 
was  baptized ;  his  wise  men  soon  shared  his  convictions 

'  See  Baeda,  Hist.  Eccl.,  i.  21 ;  Gotselinus,  Hist.  Maj.,  ii.  15-19, 


CONVERSION  OF  THE  ANGLO-SAXONS.      23 

or  obeyed  his  bidding.     A  decree  was  issued  ordering      chap. 
a    recognition    of    Christianity,''  and    10,000  ^    Kentish        "•. 
subjects  were  baptized  at  Christmas  opposite  the  Isle 
of  Sheppy. 

Auojustine  communicated  to  head-quarters  the  success  Gregory's 

^        ^  ,        -^  .  extensive 

of  the  mission,  and  Gregory's  instructions  took  him  plan  of 
to  Aries,  where  he  was  consecrated  by  Virgilius  tion. 
as  Archbishop  of  the  English.  The  metropolitan 
church  was  to  be  built  at  Canterbury,  the  capital  of 
his  royal  convert.  Twelve  bishoprics  were  to  be 
founded  in  the  south  of  England.  Twelve  more  were 
to  form  a  northern  province.  There  was  to  be  a 
metropolitan  see  at  York,  but  it  was  to  be  subject  to 
Augustine's  supremacy.^  While  such  was  the  pro- 
gramme, the  range  of  this  Eoman  mission  really  ex- 
tended to  only  one  province  besides  Kent.  In  Essex 
Sebert  nephew  to  Ethelbert  had  been  converted. 
Here  Mellitus,  one  of  a  second  contingent  of  mission- 
aries despatched  by  Gregory,  was  consecrated  Bishop  of 
London.  Kent  also  now  received  a  suffragan  bishopric 
at  Rochester,  which  was  placed  under  the  superinten- 
dence of  Justus,  who  had  accompanied  Mellitus.  At  the 
court  of  Ethelbert  his  friend  Kedwald,  King  of  East 
Anglia,  was  converted  to  Christianity  and  baptized. 
But  East  Anglia  can  hardly  be  reckoned  among  the 
provinces  won  by  Gregory's  mission.  On  returning 
home,  Redwald  was  persuaded  by  his  wife  and  the  pagan 
priests  to  combine  the  worshij)  of  Christ  with  that 
of  the  national  deities.  No  East  Anglian  bishopric 
was  founded. 

In  Augustine's   letters  to  Gregory  instructions  are  now  is 
demanded  with  respect  to  his  future  relations  with  the  to^eai  w^tn 

'  Bseda,  Hist.  Eccl.,  i.  26;  S.  Gregor.,  Epist.  VIII.,  30. 
"  S.  Gregor.,  Epist.  XI.,  65. 


24 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


native  Cliurcli.     A   naive  perplexity,  as   of  one   who 
knew  no  form  of  Christianity  but  that  taught  in  the 
Koman    monasteries,    characterizes     these     questions. 
"  Wbercas  there  is  but  one  faith,  why  are  there  different 
customs  in  different  Churches,  and  why  is  one  custom 
of  masses  observed  in  the  holy  Koman   Church,   and 
another  in  the  Gallican  Church?  .  .  .  How  are  we  to 
deal  with  the  bishops  of  France  and  Britain?"     In 
criticising   Gregory's  reply,  we   must  take   into  con- 
sideration  the  ideas    of   Eoman    supremacy  generally 
accepted  in  the  sixth  century.     Since  the  Council  of 
Sardica,  which  had  given  the  Eoman  bishop  the  right 
of  deciding  whether  a  conciliar  judgment   should  be 
reconsidered,  Eome  had   been   gradually  establishing 
herself  as  the   centre  of  Christendom,   claiming  from 
the  other  episcopates — of  the  West,  at  all  events — an 
undefined   allegiance.     Various   causes   had   combined 
to  secure  to  Eome  this  supremacy ;  not  least  effective 
had  been  the  personal  characteristics  of  certain  Popes, — 
the  brilliant  pontificates  of  Innocent,  Leo,  and  Gregory 
himself.     Writing  doubtless  in  ignorance  of  the  deep- 
rooted    animosity   which   divided   Briton   and    Saxon, 
Gregory    ordered    that    the    new    archiepiscopate    in 
Ethelbert's   dominions    should    control    not    only   all 
bishops  ordained  by  Augustine,  or  by  the  future  Arch- 
bishop of  York,  "  but  also  all  the  priests  of  Britain." 
"  Over  the  bishops  of  France,"   writes  Gregory,   "  we 
give  you  no  authority,  because  the  Bishop  of  Aries 
received  the  pall  in  ancient  times  from  my  predecessor, 
and  we  ought   by  no   means  to   deprive   him   of  the 
authority  he  has  received ;  but  as  to  all  the  Bishops  of 
Britain,  we  commit  them  to  your  care,  that  the  un- 
learned  may  be   taught,  the   feeble   strengthened   by 
persuasion,  and  the  perverse  corrected  by  authority." 


CONVERSION  OF  THE  ANGLO-SAXONS.      25 

The  papal  solution  of  the  problem  of  nonconformity  chap. 
in  ritual  is  less  open  to  censure  than  this  encroachment  ^ — 
on  national  independence.  It  breathes  a  spirit  of 
wisdom  and  toleration.  "  If  you  have  found  anything 
either  in  the  Roman,  or  the  Galilean,  or  any  other 
Church,  which  may  be  pleasing  to  Almighty  God, 
select  it  carefully  and  sedulously ;  teach  the  Anglican 
Church,  which  as  yet  is  new  in  the  faith,  whatsoever 
you  can  gather  from  the  several  Churches.  For  things 
are  not  to  be  loved  for  the  sake  of  places,  but  places 
for  the  sake  of  good  things.  Choose  therefore  from 
every  Church  those  things  that  are  pious,  religious, 
and  upright."  ^ 

Already  the  new  metropolitan  had  received  from 
Gregory  a  pall,  the  token  that  he  ruled  as  the  delegate 
of  the  Papacy.  That  such  was,  even  thus  early,  the 
significance  of  the  pall  appears  undeniable.  In  later 
times  it  was  pretended  that  the  office  of  metropolitan 
was  unattainable  without  it,  and  this  assumption  was 
finally  embodied  in  a  decree  by  the  Lateran  Council 
of  1215.  The  form  of  the  vestment  was  then  some- 
what like  that  of  the  pall  in  the  archiepiscopal  arms  of 
Canterbury — a  circular  mantle  with  long  pendants. 
But  the  pallium  sent  by  Gregory  appears  to  have  been 
a  robe  of  state,  such  as  the  emperors  had  been  wont  to 
confer  on  provincial  governors. 

To  the  British  Christians  Augustine's  assumption  of  conference 

.,,..,,      "witli  its 

metropolitan  powers  must  have  been  as  unintelligible  representa- 
as  ofi'ensive.  For  one  hundred  and  fifty  years  the 
Church  in  Britain  had  kept  the  faith  unaided  by  Popes 
or  papal  delegates.  Eome  it  knew  not,  but  Saxon 
princes,  Rome's  present  allies,  it  knew  and  hated. 
Plainly   no   ordinary  measure  of  meekness,  humility, 

'  Baeda,  Hist.  Eccl.,  i.  27;  S.  Gregor.,  Epist.  XI.,  64. 


26  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

and  forbearance  would  be  demanded  of  Augustine,  if 
this  part  of  his  enterprise  was  to  be  successful,  and  the 
A.D.  597.  insular  Church  was  to  be  conformed  to  the  Koman 
system.  Such,  however,  was  not  the  temper  in  which 
Augustine  addressed  the  British  bishops.  Bede's 
account  is  that  of  a  champion  of  the  centralizing  or 
Roman  system,  yet  Bede  sufficiently  shows  that  Augus- 
tine's demeanour  intensified  rather  than  allayed  the 
j)rejudices  of  the  native  Christians.  The  place  of 
meeting  was  afterwards  called  Augustine's  Oak  (per- 
haps Austcliffe  on  the  Severn).  Here  the  Roman 
missionary  descanted  on  the  errors  of  the  Britons, 
especially  reprobating  their  observance  of  Easter  ac- 
cording to  the  eighty-four  years  cycle.  He  cured  a 
blind  man  as  a  proof  of  his  divine  legation.  The 
insular  clergy  were  impressed  by  the  miracle,  but 
demanded  time  to  confer  with  their  own  people  on 
the  propriety  of  the  desired  changes.  Again  seven 
bishops  and  many  learned  men  from  Bangor  Iscoed 
met  Augustine,  and  now  it  was  that  his  arrogant 
demeanour  provoked  his  interlocutors  to  assume  the 
attitude  of  antagonism.  The  conference  ended  in  a 
^n?s^'  clecided  rupture.  Augustine  haughtily  propounded 
ultimatum,  his  ultimatum.  "  I  ask  but  three  things  of  you,"  he 
said :  "  one,  that  you  should  keep  Easter  as  we  do ; 
another,  that  you  should  complete  the  office  of  Baptism 
according  to  the  use  of  the  holy  and  Apostolic  Roman 
Church  ;  a  third,  that  you  should  join  us  in  preaching 
to  the  Angles.  With  your  other  peculiarities  we  shall 
patiently  bear."  The  Britons  refused  to  accejDt  these 
terms,  or  acknowledge  their  proposer  as  archbishop. 
Alluding  to  his  discourtesy  in  receiving  them  sitting, 
they  said,  "  If  he  deigns  not  now  to  rise  up  to 
us,  how  much  more  will  he  slight  us  when  we  shall 


CONVERSION  OF   THE  ANGLO-SAXONS.      27 

have  accepted  his  authority."     Augustine  parted  from      chap. 
theui  with  a   prediction   that  "  they  who   refused  to     ^Jb-^ 
show  their  neighbours  the  way  of  life  should  by  them 
be  put  to  death."  1     Bade  shows  how  the  prophecy  was  Therup- 
accomplished    when    Ethelfrid,    the    pagan    King   of 
Northumbria,   defeated    the   Welsh    at    Chester,    and 
massacred  the  twelve  hundred  monks  of  Bangor  Iscoed. 
The    date    (613)    precludes    the   modern   theory   that 
Augustine  had  used  influence  with  Ethelbert  to  induce 
Ethelfrid  to  invade  Wales. 

We  have  adopted  the  usual  course  in  assigning  to  Augustine's 
the  story  of  Augustine  more  space  than  it  really  deserves.  ^ted.°^^^" 
Augustine's  visit  to  England  was  really  but  one  episode 
in  a  record  of  missionary  enterprise  which  extends  over 
at  least  a  hundred  years.  Under  Augustine  and  his 
compatriots  Kent  and  Essex  became  for  a  time  Christian 
settlements.  A  work  in  Northumberland  was  also 
begun  by  Paulinus,  only  to  be  swept  away  when  the 
reigning  dynasty  was  ousted  by  the  heathen  Penda. 
Such  is  the  brief  sum  of  the  results,  as  far  as  conversion 
is  concerned.  We  consider,  however,  that  a  peculiar 
interest  attaches  to  this  Roman  mission  in  that  it  laid 
the  groundwork  of  our  still  surviving  ecclesiastical 
organization.  Other  missionaries  won  the  converts; 
Gregory  and  Augustine  provided  the  system  by  which, 
when  resuscitated  by  Theodore,  those  converts  became 
the  organized  Anglican  Church. 

Augustine  died  in  604,  having  appointed  and  con-  Kent  and 
secrated  his  compatriot  Laurentius  as  his  successor  at  lapse. 
Canterbury.     Laurentius  was  as  dependent  on  Rome 
as  Augustine,    but   seems   not   to   have   obtained   the 
honour  of  the  pallium.     He  opened  a  corres23ondence 
with  the  Christians  of  Ireland,  hoping  to  bring  them 

'  Baeda,  Hist.  Eccl.,  ii.  2. 


28  ECCLESIA  ANGLICANA. 

CHAP,     iiito  conformity  with  the  Eoman  Church.^    His  demands 
^\-  ^, .     were  somewhat  similar  to  those  of  Augustine,  and  met 

A.D.  604.  with  as  little  success.  Soon  indeed  the  Eoman  mission 
appeared  likely  to  lose  even  the  small  territory  which 
had  formed  the  province  of  its  first  archbishop.  Ead- 
bald,  Ethelbert's  son  and  successor,  refused  to  dissolve 
his  union  with  his  father's  widow  at  the  bidding  of 
Laurentius.  Such  marriages  had  been  customary  in  the 
heathen  times :  the  archbishop's  persistency  only  pre- 
judiced the  king  against  Christianity.  The  people,  who 
had  followed  their  chieftains  in  thousands  to  the  pool 
of  Baptism,  were  now  as  loyal  in  reasserting  the  dignity 
of  Thor  and  Odin.  In  a  few  months  Kent  and  Essex 
had  relapsed  into  paganism.  The  bishops,  Justus  and 
Mellitus,  fled  before  a  storm  of  persecution.  Laurentius 
bravely  remained ;  and  by  influences  which  Bede  ^  con- 
nects with  supernatural  occurrences,  such  as  can  onl}^  be 
categorized  as  "  pious  frauds,"  prevailed  on  Eadbald  to 
accept  the  Christian  faith  and  dissolve  his  unhallowed 
marriage.  Christianity  again  became  the  professed 
religion  of  his  kingdom.  Justus  was  recalled  to 
Kochester,  but  Eadbald  could  not  persuade  the  pagan 
Londoners  to  receive  Mellitus.  Justus  and  Mellitus 
successively  presided  at  Canterbury  after  the  death  of 
Laurentius. 

Temporary       The    short-livcd   offshoot   in    Northumbria   remains 

success  of     to  be  noticed 
Patdinusin   ^^   "^  nOLlceu. 

Northum-        Eadbald's   sister,   Ethelbur^a,  had   married   Edwin, 

bria.  _  .... 

King  of  Northumbria,  it  being  stipulated  that  she 
should  be  allowed  free  exercise  of  her  religion. 
Paulinus  accompanied  her  to  the  court  of  the  heathen 
bridegroom,  and,  in  deference  to  the  scheme  originally 
devised  by  Gregory,  was  consecrated  by  the  primate 

'  See  Baeda,  Hist.  Eccl.,  ii.  4.  '^  Ibid.,  ii.  6. 


CONVERSION  OF  THE  ANGLO-SAXONS.      29 

Justus  to  a  see  at  York.  By  appeals  to  a  mind  naturally 
superstitious,  and  by  prediction  of  successes  on  the 
battle-field,  he  gained  a  hold  over  Edwin  which  resulted 
in  his  conversion  to  Christianity.  The  leading  men  of 
his  kingdom  assembling  in  councjl  gave  unanimous 
adhesion  to  the  new  religion  ;  Coifi  the  pontiff  setting 
the  example  by  confessing  that  the  service  of  the 
paternal  gods  had  never  brought  him  any  material 
good.^  The  temple  of  the  disavowed  religion  was  pro- 
faned and  burnt ;  and  York  Minster  was  anticipated  by 
a  humble  wooden  edifice,  the  metropolitan  church  of 
the  North.  Edwin  was  baptized  on  Easter  Day,  627, 
and  the  example  of  the  royal  proselyte  caused,  as 
usual,  the  conversion  of  numerous  subjects.  The  new 
religion  was  afterwards  extended  throughout  North- 
umbria  by  less  questionable  influences ;  and  we  are  told 
that  Paulinus  devoted  himself  to  incessant  preaching 
and  catechizing.  Like  the  kindred  foundation  in 
Essex,  however,  the  Northumbrian  settlement  depended 
on  the  life  of  its  royal  patron.  Eight  years  after 
his  baptism,  Edwin  died  in  battle.  A  pagan  reaction 
set  in,  and  Paulinus  fled  with  the  widowed  queen  to 
Kent,  the  only  province  in  which  Gregory's  mission- 
aries had  secured  a  jDermanent  hold.  Honorius,  the 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  appointed  Paulinus  to  the 
see  of  Eoch ester.  When  Honorius  died,  some  sixty 
years  after  the  landing  of  Augustine,  the  only  suffragan 
see  in  connection -with  Canterbury  was  the  neighbouring 
town  of  Rochester.  For  two  years  the  see  of  Canter- 
bury remained  void,  an  anomaly  which  has  been 
ascribed  to  tlie  jealousy  of  Wessex  and  Northumbria. 

The  failure  of  Gregory's  envoys    was  retrieved  by  interven- 

11  ,1  •  />  1  tionofmis- 

missionaries  who  knew  nothing  01  papal  supremacy,  sionaries 

'  Baeda,  Hist.  Eccl.,  iii.  25,  26. 


30 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


A.B.  684. 


and  whose  customs  were  to  some  extent  different  from 
those  of  Eome.  On  this  account  their  work  has  re- 
ceived but  scant  acknowledgment  at  the  hands  of 
historians  who  wrote  when  the  Roman  system  had 
obtained  the  mastery. 

We  have  described  in  the  preceding  chapter  the 
Christian  settlements  planted  by  the  Welsh  and  Irish 
among  the  Picts  of  Scotland.  It  was  by  ecclesiastics 
connected  with  this  North  British  Church  that  the 
permanent  establishment  of  Christianity  in  the  greater 
part  of  England  was  effected.  About  the  year  634, 
there  succeeded  to  the  throne  of  Northumbria  a  prince 
who  had  been  baptized  and  taught  by  the  monks  of 
Scotland.  Oswald's  first  care  was  to  send  to  Hy  for  a 
bishop  who  should  rescue  his  subjects  from  the  dark- 
ness of  Paganism.  Corman  came  first,  but  found  him- 
self unfitted  by  temperament  for  a  work  requiring  the 
utmost  patience  and  self-control.  Aidan,  a  man  of 
great  meekness  and  discretion,  took  his  place.^  Igno- 
rant or  heedless  of  the  organization  which  Gregory 
had  prescribed,  Aidan  placed  his  see  not  at  York, 
but  in  Lindisfarne,  afterwards  called  Holy  Island. 
Hither  he  summoned  a  band  of  missionaries  from  the 
establishments  of  Columban  in  the  North,  and  by  their 
exertions  Christianity  was  spread  throughout  the  twin 
Northumbrian  provinces  of  Bernicia  and  Deira.  At  the 
court  of  Northumbria  Prince  Peada  of  Mercia  learnt 
Christianity.  He  took  back  with  him  to  his  father's 
kingdom  four  missionary  priests — Cedda,  Adda,  Betti, 
and  Diuma.  Labouring  among  the  people  as  much  as 
among  the  nobles,  these  preachers  gained  for  Christianity 
a  permanent  hold  in  the  affections  of  the  Mercians.^ 
Finan,  also  a  disciple  of  the  college  at  Hy,  had  succeeded 


'  Baeda,  Hist.  Eccl.,  iii.  5,  6,  14. 


"  Ibid.,  iii.  21. 


CONVERSION  OF  THE  ANGLO-SAXONS.      31 

Aidan  at  Lindisfarne.  By  Finan,  Diuma  was  consecrated  chap. 
as  the  first  bishop  of  the  Mercians.  The  centre  of  the  _!!:_ 
episcopal  see  was  Lichfield.  Oswy,  the  successor  of  a.d.  642. 
Oswald,  persuaded  Sigebert,  King  of  Essex,  to  embrace 
the  faith.  Here  again  a  North  British  missionary  was 
sent  for.  The  missionary  was  Cedda.  He  succeeded 
in  establishing  Christianity  in  Essex,  and  was  conse- 
crated by  Finan  as  Bishop  of  London.^  East  Anglia 
was  converted  by  the  exertions  of  Felix,  a  Burgundian 
missionary,  with  whom  Fursy,  a  Celtic  monk,  co- 
operated. Felix  received  no  assistance  from  Canter- 
bury. In  Wessex  there  appeared  a  Eoman  mission- 
ary, sent  by  Pope  Honorius,  who  laboured  with  much 
success,  and  established  the  see  of  Dorchester,  near 
Oxford.  It  is  a  singular  fact  that  Honorius,  in  sending 
Birinus,  took  no  notice  of  the  establishment  at  Canter- 
bury. Sussex  was  the  last  kingdom  to  receive  Chris- 
tianity, a  fact  which  speaks  little  for  the  zeal  of  the 
neighbouring  Church  of  Kent.  Its  king,  ^dilwalch, 
was  converted  at  the  court  of  Wulfhere,  King  of  Mercia. 
But  the  recovery  of  the  tribe  from  heathenism  and 
barbarous  practices  was  reserved  for  Wilfrid,  whose 
labours  will  be  described  below. 

A  collision  between  the  two  srreat  missionary  schools  collision 

.  _    ,  .  .  -IT  n  P  between 

was  unavoidable.  As  might  have  been  loreseen,  thetwo 
the  insular  system  was  the  one  to  succumb.  The 
pretensions  of  the  Papacy  won  the  victory  for  the 
foreign  ritual ;  and  the  acceptance  of  the  Eoman  Easter 
prejoared  England  for  a  defined  ecclesiastical  organiza- 
tion such  as  Gregory  had  contemplated.  Setting  aside 
the  means  by  which  it  was  attained,  such  an  issue  is 
hardly  matter  of  regret.  The  verdict  was  given  at  a 
synod   held   at   Whitby   (Streaneshale)   in    664.     The 

*  Bseda,  Hist.  Eccl.,  ill.  21,  22. 


32  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

two  uses  had  come  into  collision  at  the  court  of  Oswy, 
the  very  centre  of  North  British  influences.  Oswy  had 
married  Eanfleda,  the  daughter  of  Edwin  and  the 
Kentish  Ethelburga.  From  the  Church  of  Canterbury 
Eanfleda  had  learnt  the  importance  of  keeping  Easter 
according  to  the  Eoman  use.  Her  husband  observed  it 
as  he  was  directed  by  the  Church  of  North  Britain. 
Hence  the  scandal  that  one  part  of  the  court  feasted 
Council  of  while  the  other  part  kept  fast.  The  matter  was  re- 
^Tp'^eei  ferred  to  a  synod,  to  which  the  two  Churches  seilt 
representatives.  Oswy,  who  presided,  dilated  on  the 
value  of  uniformity  and  the  duty  of  ascertaining  which 
was  the  best  tradition.  Thereupon,  on  behalf  of  the 
British  Easter,  Bishop  Colman  cited  the  authority  of 
S.  John,  of  Anatolius  the  ecclesiastical  historian,  and 
of  S.  Columban.  The  champions  of  Eoman  usage  were 
Wilfrid,  under  whose  tuition  Oswy's  son  had  been 
educated,  and  Agilbert  Bishop  of  Dorchester.  Wilfrid 
treated  the  arguments  of  Colman  with  unconcealed 
contempt :  he  appealed  to  continental  usage,  to  the 
Council  of  Niceea,  to  the  supreme  power  delegated  to 
the  Eoman  Church  by  S.  Peter.  This  last  argument 
was  considered  decisive  by  Oswy.  Colman  having 
admitted  that  S.  Peter  kept  the  keys  of  heaven,  "  then," 
said  the  king,  "I  will  not  contradict  him,  lest  when  1 
come  to  the  gates  of  heaven  there  should  be  no  one  to 
open  them,  if  he  is  mj'-  adversar}^"  i  The  assembly 
agreed  with  Oswy.  Colman  and  such  of  his  adherents 
as  were  unconvinced  retired  to  their  monasteries ; 
Cedda,  with  the  mass  of  English  Christians,  conformed 
to  the  Eoman  usages.  But  it  was  not  till  about  716 
that  the  monastic  stations  of  the  North  accepted  the 
coronal  tonsure  and  the  Eoman  computation  of  Easter. 

'  Bseda,  Hist.  Eccl.,  ii.  13. 


THE  NATIONAL  ANGLO-SAXON  CHURCH.    33 


CHAPTER  III. 

Wsit  i^ational  ^ng;lo=^aaLOtt  ®f)ut;c]^. 

A.D.  664-1066. 

Steps  taken  to  consolidate  the  Heptarchic  Church — Archbishop  Theodore — Case  of 
Wilfrid — Subdivision  of  large  dioceses — Extended  organization — The  parochial 
system — Great  literary  impulse — Anglo-Saxon  Church  in  its  relations  to  Rome — 
Allegiance  uncertain,  e.g.  in  the  case  of  Wilfrid — The  one  Church  of  the 
Heptarchic  kingdoms — Its  capacity  for  corporate  action — Its  relations  to  the 
tribal  systems — Fusion  of  Church  and  State — Maintenance  of  clergy— The  parish 
church — Treatment  of  heathen  practices — Doctrines  of  the  Anglo-Saxon  Church 
— Celibacy  of  clergy — Penitential  system — The  age  of  great  writers — Bede — 
Egbert  of  York — Csdmon  the  poet — Aldhelm— Alcuin — And  great  missionaries 
— Willibrord — Boniface — Mania  for  monasticism — And  pilgrimages — Council  of 
Cloveshoo — The  archbishopric  of  Lichfield  sanctioned  by  Rome — Peter's  pence 
— England  and  the  iconoclastic  controversy — Union  of  the  principalities — The 
Church  shaken  by  the  Danish  invasion — Alfred — John  Scotus  Erigena — The 
dogma  of  transubstantiation — The  False  Decretals — Conflict  between  regulars 
and  seculars — Odo — Dunstan — Elfric  the  homilist — Canute — Edward  the  Con- 
fessor— A  glance  at  Church  history  abroad — Progress  of  the  centralizing  system 
— Its  advantages — Tiie  period  closes  on  a  harmonious  state  of  things — Which  is 
completely  transformed  in  the  age  ensuing. 

In   tlie  kingdoTus   of  the   Heptarcliy   tlie  triumph   of  steps 
Roman  usage  was  from  this  time  insured.     The  idea  consoudate 
of  conformity  naturally  suggested  that  of  unity ;  and  tarcwc  ' 
Oswy's  recognition  of  the  Roman  Easter  was  succeeded  ^^^^^• 
by  measures  for  consolidating  the  independent  Hep- 
tarchic sees  in  a  national  Church,  such  as  had  been 
conceived  of  by  Gregory.     The  first  step  was  to  secure 
a  primate  to  whom  the  bishops  of  the  several  kingdoms 
would  render  obedience.     Northumbria  and  Kent,  the 
two  chief  centres  of  Christian   agency,  seem  to  have 
come  to  an  understanding  on  this  point,  without  con- 

D 


34  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

CHAP,      suiting   the   great   kingdoms   of  Mercia   and  Wessex, 


III. 


Oswy  and  Egbert  agreed  that  Canterbury  was  the 
A.D.  667.  metropolitan  see  of  England.  Frithona,  a  Saxon,  who 
after  its  two  years'  vacation  was  consecrated  to  this  see 
with  the  title  Deusdedit,  had  lately  died.  The  kings 
of  Northumbria  and  Kent  selected  Wighard  as  his 
successor,  and  sent  him  to  Rome  for  consecration. 
Wighard  died  shortly  after  his  arrival  at  Eome.  It 
appears  that  the  kings,  when  informed  of  this  event, 
petitioned  Pope  Vitalian  to  nominate  a  primate.^  The 
archbishopric  of  Canterbury  was  offered  by  Vitalian 
to  Adrian,  a  learned  monk  of  African  birth.  Adrian 
refused,  but  recommended  his  friend  Theodore,  a  native 
of  Tarsus  in  Cilicia,  and  Theodore  was  consecrated  at 
Rome  in  March,  668.  Travelling  very  leisurely,  he  came 
to  Canterbury,  accompanied  by  Adrian,  in  May,  669. 
Ardibishop  Thcodore  of  Tarsus  was  gifted  by  nature  with 
talents  of  the  highest  order,  and  his  advanced  age  at  the 
time  of  his  appointment  had  in  no  way  impaired  these 
endowments.  He  stands  first  chronologically  among 
the  primates  of  all  England ;  and,  if  not  first,  among 
the  foremost  in  point  of  ability  and  historical  import- 
ance. The  bishops  of  the  Heptarchy  appear  to  have 
submitted  to  their  new  ecclesiastical  chief  with  a 
unanimity  for  which  Theodore's  personal  reputation 
and  Roman  credentials  sufficiently  account. 
Case  of  The   first  case  which   Theodore  had  to  decide  was 

that  of  the  Northumbrian  bishopric.  Oswy  had  re- 
established York  as  the  northern  see,  and  Tuda,  one 
of  the  Scotch  divines,  had  occupied  it  till  his  death. 
Wilfrid,  the  champion  of  Roman  usage  at  Whitby,  had 
been  appointed  to  succeed  him.     It  was  characteristic 

'  This  fact  is  vainly  contested  by  Mr.  Soames :  see  Kemble,  Saxons  in  England, 
ii.  365  and  note. 


Wilfrid. 


THE  NATIONAL  ANGLO-SAXON  CHURCH.     35 

of  Wilfrid  that  he  should  scorn  to  be  consecrated  by 
insular  prelates.  The  British  and  Scotch  episcopate  was 
spurned  because  not  clearly  connected  with  Kome.  Deus- 
dedit's  purer  pedigree  was  not  sufficient  to  atone  for  a 
latent  sympathy  with  the  "schismatic"  Celts.  Wilfrid 
went  to  Paris,  and  was  there  consecrated  by  Archbishop 
Agilbert.  His  sciaiples  did  not  preclude  a  protracted 
absence  from  his  new  see,  which  induced  Oswy  to  fill 
up  his  place  by  the  appointment  of  Chad,  brother  to 
Cedda.  Chad  had  been  consecrated  by  Wine,  the  Bishop 
of  Winchester,  assisted  by  two  British  bishops.  Wilfrid 
now  appealed  to  Theodore  to  reinstal  him.  It  is  not 
pleasing  to  learn  that  Theodore's  policy  or  conviction 
induced  him  to  rule  that  a  consecration  in  which  the 
native  prelates  ^  had  taken  part  was  uncanonical,  and 
that  Chad's  claim  was  therefore  invalid.  Wilfrid 
was  restored.  Chad  retired  cheerfully  to  his  beloved 
abbey  at  Lastingham,  to  be  raised  shortly  to  the  see 
of  Lichfield,  when  he  submitted  to  a  second  conse- 
cration. 

Hitherto  Christianity  in  England  had  been  repre-  subdivision 
sented  by  bishoprics  coextensive  with  kingdoms.^  dioceses. 
Some  of  these  were  far  too  vast  for  the  care  of  one 
diocesan.  This  arrangement  was  also  a  bar  to  corporate 
action  on  the  part  of  the  Church,  the  bishops  being  too 
much  associated  with  the  conflicting  interests  of  the 
several  principalities  to  regard  themselves  as  members 
of  a  religious  fraternity.  Theodore  would  obviously 
have  to  face  the  unpopular  enterprise  of  subdividing 
the   dioceses.     Before  taking   steps   in   this   direction,  ^ 

*  Or,  to  speak  more  strictly,  such  of  the  native  prelates  as  did  not  accept  the 
Roman  Easter  and  tonsure.    See  Capitula  et  Fragmenta  Theodori,  Thorpe,  307. 

-  "Kent,"  says  Mr.  Kemble,  "is  probably  only  an  apparent  exception. 
Rochester  can  hardly  have  been  otherwise  than  the  capital  of  a  subordinate  king- 
dom."—Saxons  in  England,  vol.  ii.  p.  361. 


36  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

CHAP,      he  wisely  endeavoured  to  make  tlie  suffragans  realize 
^-i^I—    the  advantages  of  a  more  elaborate  ecclesiastical  system. 
A.D.  673.     He  convened  a  synod  at  Hertford  (673),  at  which  he 
produced  a  body  of  canon  law,  ranged  under  ten  heads, 
which    he    specially    commended    to    the    acceptance 
of  those  present.^     These  canons  prescribe  the  Eoman 
Easter;  lay  down  certain  rules  for  bishops,  clergy,  and 
monks;   provide   for   the   holding  of  synods  twice  in 
every   year;    and   order  penalties   for   breach   of    the 
matrimonial  tie.     They  were  examined  and  accepted 
by   the    synod    in   the   name    of    the    entire    Church. 
Cloveshoo  was   appointed  as   the  meeting- place  ^  of  a 
yearly  synod.     The    scheme  for  breaking  up  the   big 
dioceses    was     broached,    and    received    some    sort    of 
sanction,  one  of   the  canons   prescribing    that    as    the 
number  of  the  faithful    increased  the  bishops   might 
be  increased  to  greater  number.     Theodore  began  at 
once  to  avail  himself  of  this  canon.     East  Anglia  w^as 
provided  with  two  sees,  at  Elmham  and  at  Dunwich. 
Meicia,  in  spite  of  Winfrid's  opposition,  received  the 
sees  of  Hereford,  Worcester,  and  Leicester  in  addition 
to  Lichfield.     In  Northumbria  Wilfrid  had  lost  court 
favour.     Egfrid  and  his  queen  themselves  urged  Theo- 
dore to  break  up  the  unwieldy  diocese  of  York.    Wilfrid 
made  resistance ;  and  was  deposed,  if  not  degraded,  by 
Theodore,  who  had    previously  treated  Winfrid  with 
similar  severity.     The  Northumbrian  diocese  was  ulti- 
mately  apportioned   between    Whithern,    Lindisfarne, 
Hexham,  and  Sidnacester.     Wessex  alone  of  the  large 
kingdoms  succeeded  in  escaping  disruption.     Its  appor- 
tionment to   Winchester   and   Sherborne  was  effected 

'  The  bishops  of  East  Anglia,  Eochester,  Wessex,  and  Mercia  were  personally 
present.  Wilfrid  of  Northumbria  sent  two  representatives.  Several  learned 
divines  of  lower  grade  attended. 

-  Baeda,  Hist.  Eccl.,  iv.  5. 


THE  NATIONAL  ANGLO-SAXON  CHURCH.     37 

very  shortly  after  Theodore's  death.  The  Church  then 
found  itself  ranged  under  sixteen  sees,  subject  to  one 
metropolitan  at  Canterbury.^ 

With  the  subdivision  of  dioceses  came  a  great  de-  Extended 
velopment  of  the  monastic  system,  and  the  establish-  tfo^'^^^^" 
meut  of  some  form  of  provision  for  the  village  clergy. 
That  Theodore  himself  is  the  author  of  the  arrangement, 
by  which  the  patronage  of  the  Church  and  the  main- 
tenance of  the  incumbent  lay  in  the  founder's  family,^ 
is  a  tradition    of  little   value.     Nor   is   it   plain   that  Theparo- 
England   was   now   adapted   to   any    foreign    form    oftem. 
parochial  system.     "  What  measures  Theodore,  who  is 
the  traditional  creator  of  the  parochial  system,  took  in 
this    direction    can   only   be   conjectured :    it   is   un- 
necessary to  sujDpose  that  he  founded  it,  for  it  needed 
no    foundation.     As  the  kingdom  and  the  shire  were 
the  natural  sphere  of  the  bishop,  so  was  the  township 
of  the  single  priest ;  and  the  parish  was  but  the  town- 
ship  or    cluster   of    townships    to    which    the    priest 
ministered.     The  fact  that  the  tv/o  systems,  the  parish 
and   the   township,  have   existed    for   more   than   one 
thousand    years   side  by   side,    identical   in  area,    and 
administered  by  the  same  persons,  and  yet  separate  in 

'  This  arrangement  was  so  far  altered  in  735  that  York,  then  presided  over  by  the 
celebrated  Egbert,  became  the  metropolitan  see  of  the  northern  dioceses  of  Lindis- 
farne,  Hexham,  and  Whithern.  It  may  be  remarked  here  that  the  ambiguous 
relations  of  York  and  Canterbury  proved  a  fruitful  source  of  contention  in  the 
Anglo-Norman  times.  Thus  Thomas  of  York  tried  to  resist  Lanfranc,  maintaining 
that  the  primacy  ought  to  be  held  alternately  by  Canterbury,  York,  and  London. 
On  Anselm's  accession  Thomas  established  his  own  claim  to  the  rank  of  "metro- 
politan" (1093).  The  prerogative  of  Canterbury  was  in  that  year  first  expressed 
in  the  terms  which  still  obtain — "  totius  Britannia  Primas."  Half  a  century  later 
at  the  petition  of  Archbishop  Theobald,  the  pre-eminence  of  Canterbury  was  put 
beyond  dispute  by  the  primate's  becoming  "  Legatus  Natus  "  of  the  Roman  see  by 
virtue  of  his  office.  During  the  Saxon  period,  however,  the  subordinate  position 
of  York  was  not  often  questioned.  Nor  was  Theodore's  scheme  shaken  by  Offa's 
attempt  to  establish  a  third  archbishopric  in  the  midlands  (787).  The  pretensions 
of  Lichfield  did  not  survive  Archbishop  Higbert. 

'  See  Elmham,  ed.  Hardwick,  pp.  285,  286. 


38 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


Great 

literary 

impulse. 


character  and  machinery,  is  a  sufficient  proof  that  no 
legislative  act  could  have  been  needed."  ^ 

The  services  rendered  to  literature  by  Theodore  and 
his   friend   Adrian    are    scarcely   less   important   than 
this  work  of  ecclesiastical  organization.     Theodore  has 
been  called  the  father  of  Anglo-Saxon  literature.    With 
his  primacy  came  an  educational  impulse  somewhat  like 
that  of  the  "  New  Learning  "  in  the  sixteenth  century. 
It  was  not  till  the  destruction  of  the  monasteries  by 
the  Northmen   that   this   impulse   subsided.     By  that 
time  English  scholars,  such  as  Bede  and  Alcuin,  had 
won    a   European    reputation,   and    the   skill    of    our 
monastic   copyists   become  proverbial.      "  In  a  single 
century  England  became  known  as  a  fountain  of  light, 
as    a    land    of    learned   men,    devout   and   unwearied 
missions,  of  strong,  rich,  and  pious  kings."  ^     Himself 
a  Greek  divine,  Theodore  introduced  into  England  a 
class   of  studies   almost  unknown  in   Western    Chris- 
tendom.    For  the  special  study  of  his  native  language 
he  founded  a  school  at  Canterbury,  on  v^^hich  he  be- 
stowed a  number  of  books.     Greek  copies  of  the  Scrip- 
tures were  transmitted  from  the  East,  and  copied  with 
assiduous  care  bj^  the  monks  of  England.^     The  Codex 
E.,^  one  of  the  most  precious  treasures  of  the  Bodleian, 
is  supposed  to  be  one  of  the  manuscripts  with  which 
Theodore   enriched   England.     It   is   related  by  Bede 
that   the    primate   and   Adrian   themselves   gave   oral 
instruction  to  students  in  every  branch  of  scholarship. 
Otlier   names   besides  those   of  Theodore  and  Adrian 
deserve   mentioh   in   connection   with    the    revival   of 

'  Stubbs,  Const.  Hist.,  i.  227.  ^  Ibid.,  i.  219. 

^  The  value  of  such  services  can  hardly  be  rightly  estimated  in  our  own  days. 
It  is  difiQcult  to  conceive  of  an  entire  Christian  diocese  in  which  not  one  copy  of  the 
Old  i)r  New  Testament  in  any  language  existed.  Yet  such  Mr.  Kemble  shows  to 
have  been  the  state  of  the  diocese  of  Lisieux  in  the  9th  century :  see  Saxons  in 
J^ngland,  ii.  433,  note.  *  Or  Laudianus,  35. 


THE  NATIONAL  ANGLO-SAXON  CHURCH.     39 

literature.  Wilfrid,  to  borrow  Dean  Milman's  ex-  chap. 
pression,  returned  from  his  visits  to  Eome  "  with  other  — J.^ 
literarj'-  treasures  besides  papal  rescripts  in  his  favour." 
Benedict  Biscop,  who  had  accompanied  Wilfrid  to  Eome 
in  654,  was  equally  assiduous  as  a  collector  of  books. 
It  was  by  these  two  Northumbrian  scholars  that  the 
celebrated  monastery  at  the  mouth  of  the  Wear  was 
founded.  Here  their  spoils  were  deposited;  and  here 
Benedict  brought  John  the  Precentor  from  Eome  itself, 
to  teach  his  monks  the  knowledge  of  Latin  and  of 
sacred  music.  The  next  generation  witnessed  the 
foundation  of  a  library  of  probably  greater  value. 
This  was  Archbishop  Egbert's  collection  at  York.  Of 
the  contents  Alcuin,  Egbert's  librarian,  gives  a  cata- 
logue, which  includes  all  the  great  ecclesiastical  writers 
and  not  a  few  of  the  Latin  classics. 

The  anti-papal  proclivities  of  some  historians  have  Ang-io- 
been  gratified  by  a  hint  supplied  by  Bede,  which  suggests  cimrch  in 
that  Pope  Vitalian  mistrusted  the  allegiance  of  the  Greek  to  Rome, 
primate  to  the  customs  of  the  Eoman  see.  Mr.  Soames 
discovers  that  Theodore's  friend  Adrian  was  "  a  spy 
upon  his  actions,"  and  that  Yitalian  "  gladly  renewed  " 
this  espionage  by  means  of  John  the  Precentor.  It  is 
probable  that  Theodore's  Greek  birth  and  independence 
of  character  did  actually  make  him  somewhat  impatient 
of  Eoman  interference.  Eome  was  undoubtedly  re- 
garded in  England  as  the  metropolis  of  Christendom, 
and  the  decision  of  the  Eoman  synod  which  condemned 
the  Monothelites  was  dutifully  endorsed  by  a  con- 
vention at  Hatfield  (680).  But  the  pretensions  of  the 
Pope  were  still  vague  and  undefined.  How  precarious 
was  the  allegiance  of  England  to  S.  Peter's  representa- 
tive is  shown  by  the  history  of  Wilfrid. 

Deposed  by   Theodore   from  the  see  of  York,  Wil-  Allegiance 


40 


ECCLESTA   ANGLICANA. 


CHAP,  frid  journeyed  to  Eome  to  secure  papal  interposition. 

— ^ —  Some    kind    of   synod    held    at   Eome   pronounced  his 

^^^^•'^^tiT'  deposition   uncanonical,   and    Pope   Agatho   gave  him 

case  of  a   letter   which   set   forth   this   decision.     Of  so  little 

"Wilfrid. 

value,  however,  was  papal  support,^  that  Wilfrid  only 
returned  to  Northumbria  to  be  imprisoned  for  nine 
AD. 679.  months  by  King  Egfrid,  and  then  banished  the  king- 
dom. The  subsequent  career  of  Wilfrid  is  too  inter- 
esting for  us  to  end  the  story  here.  Undaunted  by 
failure  and  disgrace,  he  journeyed  into  the  barbarous 
province  of  Sussex,  to  strike  out  a  new  career  as  a 
missiouary.  The  natives  of  Sussex  were  savages,  so 
ignorant  that  Wilfred  was  hailed  as  their  preserver 
when,  in  a  season  of  scarcity,  he  taught  them  how  to 
catch  fish.  He  soon  established  a  bishopric  at  Selsey, 
and  the  fame  of  his  missionary  labours  reached  the 
ears  of  Theodore.  The  aged  archbishop  seems  to  have 
thought  that  a  man  of  such  ability  as  Wilfrid  would 
be  a  fit  successor  to  himself  at  Canterbury.  He  ap- 
pealed to  Alfrid,  the  successor  of  Egfrid,  to  reinstate 
the  exiled  prelate  at  York.  Wilfrid,  somewhat  un- 
happily for  his  fame,  returned  to  Northumbria.  Fresh 
disputes  arose,  the  ground  being  (according  to  Eddius) 
Wilfrid's  continued  aversion  to  the  dismemberment  of 
the  Northumbrian  see,  and  his  repudiation^  of  some  of 
Theodore's  canons.  Again  driven  into  exile,  he  again 
journeyed  to  Rome,  and  again  a  papal  rescript  in  Wil- 
frid's favour  was  disregarded  by  the  secular  and  eccle- 
siastical authorities  of  England.  It  was  not  till  after 
Alfrid's   death  that  Wilfrid  was  allowed  to  repossess 


'  He  was  accused  of  obtaining  it  by  bribes :  see  Eddius,  Vit.  S.  Wilfr.,  xxxiii. 

*  He  taunted  the  synod  at  Eastanfeld  with  Theodore's  non-compliant  attitude 
towards  Rome.  Did  they  dare,  he  asked,  compare  their  schismatic  prelate  with 
"  holy  Agatho,  and  Benedict  the  chosen,  and  Sergius  the  blessed  ?  "  The  authority 
is  Jlddius,  who  was  probably  present  at  the  synod. 


THE  NATIONAL  ANGLO-SAXON  CHURCH.    41 

liimself  of  a  part  of  his  former  dominions.    He  recovered      chap, 

the  see  of  Hexham  and  the  abbey  of  Kipon ;  and  these     ^— ^1_ 

he  held  peaceably  during  the  last  four  years  of  his  life. 

He  died  in  709.     His  zeal  for  Italian  usage  and  his 

invocation  of  Eoman  authority  were  rewarded  in  after 

years  by  the  posthumous  honour  of  canonization,  which 

has  been  denied  to  Theodore/  a  greater  divine  but  less 

dutiful  servant  of  Rome. 

So  readily  had  the  organization  provided  by  Theo-  ^^^  ^^ 

dore  been  accepted,  that  from  this  time  (more  than  a  p,^"£?^  °^ 
J-       '  /^  the  Hep- 

hundred    years   before  the  Heptarchic  kingdoms  were  tarcMc 

X  o  kingdoms. 

united  under  one  temporal  head)  the  Church  of  England 
maintained  its  unity  and  capacity  for  corporate  action. 
The  secular  organization  of  England  was  one  of  disin- 
tegrated tribes,  whose  princes  rarely  met  in  council,  soo 
and  whose  occasional  coalition  was  a  mere  political 
accident.  Its  ecclesiastical  organization,  on  the  other 
hand,  was  based  on  the  corporate  action  of  its  clergy. 
The  bishops  and  abbots  convened  harmoniously  from 
all  parts  of  England,  and  passed  canons  which  were 
accepted  by  the  entire  "  ecclesia  Anglorum  et  Sax- 
onum."  ^  From  time  to  time  this  harmony  may  have 
been  disturbed  by  the  doubtful  claim  of  York,  or  the 
baseless  pretence  of  Lichfield,  to  a  primacy  akin  to 
that  of  Canterbury ;  but  such  survival  of  tribal  jealousy 
appears  at  no  time  to  have  effected  absolute  breach  of 
communion.  It  may  be  added  that  the  ecclesiastical 
polity  of  England  was  extended  to  regions  which  still 
defied  the  military  skill  of  her   temporal   chieftains. 

'  Theodore  died  in  699,  Achian  in  680. 

*  Mr.  Stubbs  remarks  (Const.  Hist.,  vol.  1.  p.  113) :  "  The  unity  of  the  Church 
was  the  only  working  unity,  the  law  of  religion  the  only  universally  recognized 
common  jurisprudence.  The  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  stood  constantly,  as  the 
Bretwalda  never  stood,  at  the  head  of  an  organized  and  symmetrical  system,  all  of 
the  ofiacers  of  which  were  bound  by  their  profession  of  obedience  to  him." 


42  '  ECCLESIA    ANGLICANA. 

CHAP.      Wales  gradually  changed  its  attitude  of  jealous  conser- 


ni. 


vatism,  and  for  ecclesiastical  purposes  became  almost 
part  and  parcel  of  England.  It  had  adopted  the 
Anglican  usages  before  the  end  of  the  eighth  century : 
after  the  beginning  of  the  ninth  there  are  instances  of 
Welsh  bishops  going  to  Canterbury  for  consecration. 
Its  capacity      The  Anglo-Saxon  Church  may  be  depicted  from  two 

for  corpo-        t-  .  p-  t  !••• 

rate  action.  Qistmct  points  01  vicw,  accordiug  as  we  regard  it  m  its 
entirety,  or  in  its  relation  to  the  several  principalities. 

(1.)  The  bishops,  the  abbots,  and  perhaps  the  dele- 
gates of  the  parochial  clergy  met  from  time  to  time 
in  ecclesiastical  Councils.  Their  canons  bore  solely  on 
the  spiritual  concerns  of  the  nation  ;  but  they  were  not 
binding  on  the  clergy  only.  Kings  and  ealdormen 
were  sometimes  present  at  these  Councils  (as  e.g.  Offa 
at  Calcuith  in  787,  and  Kenulf  at  Chelsea  in  816),  and 
even  attested  their  decrees.  But  it  does  not  appear 
that  they  w^ere  permitted  to  take  part  in  the  conciliar 
legislation.  Theodore  had  provided  that  these  Councils 
should  be  held  annually  at  Cloveshoo.  This  arrange- 
ment was  not  observed  with  respect  to  time,  nor  even 
with  respect  to  place.  The  Councils  were  convened 
rarely,  to  meet  important  exigencies  :  the  places  selected 
were  often  such  border  towns  as  were  most  accessible. 
Thus  Boniface's  complaints  induced  Archbishop  Cuth- 
bert  to  convene  the  synod  at  Cloveshoo  in  747,  which 
passed  canons  for  the  amelioration  of  morals.  The  synod 
at  Calcuith,  in  787,  met  to  consider  Offa's  important 
scheme  for  making  Lichfield  a  metropolitan  see. 

itsreia-  (2.)  The  tribal  relations  of  the  clergy  are  a  subject 

tions  to  tlie         p  j.'i»  n»  ,  ~r  >  j1/ 

tribal  sys-    ^i  greater  intricacy  and  importance,     it  appears  that 

®™®'  as  the  Saxon  kingdoms  were  converted,  an  adaptation 

of  the   tribal   institutions   took  place,  which  resulted 

in  what  we  should  now  call  a  union  of  Church  and 


THE  NATIONAL  ANGLO-SAXON  CHURCH.    43 
State.     The  government  in  these  kingdoms  was,  as  is     chap. 

•  .  .  •  IIT. 

well  known,  constitutional.  Each  had  its  Witenagemot ;  — ^ — 
and  therein  sat  bishops,  and  sometimes  abbots,  and  per- 
haps other  clergy,  with  the  ealdormen  of  the  shires 
and  the  king's  thegns.  Ecclesiastical  matters,  as  well 
as  secular,  were  certainly  discussed  by  the  tribal  Witan ; 
and  it  is  not  easy  to  dejS.ne  how  its  "  dooms "  were 
subordinated  to  those  of  the  ecclesiastical  Witan  or 
national  Church  Council.  The  king  and  the  Witan 
legislated  on  such  matters  as  the  sanctity  of  oaths  and 
marriage  vows ;  the  enforcement  of  Sundays  and  holy 
days  ;  the  levy  and  expenditure  of  ecclesiastical 
revenue;  and  the  appointment  of  fasts  and  festivals. 
Bishops,  it  seems,  were  often  nominated  in  the  Witan,  Fusion  of 
though  in  the  case  of  the  less  important  sees  election  stata^^'^'^ 
by  the  clergy  appears  to  have  been  the  rule.  Christi- 
anity soon  penetrated  the  judicial  and  executive 
institutions  of  the  Anglo-Saxons.  The  bishop  sat 
with  the  earl  in  the  county  court,  besides  taking 
cognizance  of  a  certain  class  of  offences  in  his  own 
court.  The  State  facilitated  the  execution  of  the 
episcopal  sentence,  even  where  purely  spiritual :  "  the 
outlaw  of  God  and  the  outlaw  of  the  king,  the  excom- 
municated man  and  the  convicted  criminal,  are  alike 
set  without  the  protection  of  the  peace."  Clerical 
criminals,  however,  were  not  let  off,  as  in  a  later  age, 
with  spiritual  sentences.  They  were  punished  as  other 
citizens.  In  like  manner  the  usual  secular  services 
were  exacted  from  the  lands  belonging  to  the  clergy. 
Except  in  a  few  rare  cases,  clerical  property  was  sub- 
ject to  the  trinoda  necessitas  ^ — maintenance  of  roads  and 
bridges,  maintenance  of  forts,  and  maintenance  of 
troops. 

'  See  Palgrave's  Engl.  Commonwealth,  i.  157-159. 


44 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


This  brings  us  to  the  subject  of  the  incomes  of  the 
clergy,  and  the  legal  provisions  for  their  sustenance. 
Tithe-pa3nient,  customary  since  the  fourth  century, 
had  been  declared  obligatory  at  the  synod  of  Tours  in 
567  ;  and  there  is  little  doubt  that  at  the  conversion  of 
Anglo-Saxon  England  this  mode  of  providing  for  the 
clergy-^  was  introduced.  The  ecclesiastical  Council  at 
Calcuith  (787)  treats  tithe-payment  as  an  established 
practice.  But  no  distinct  legislation  on  this  subject 
occurs  till  920,  when  Athelstan  and  the  national  Witan 
enjoin  the  payment  of  the  tenth  "of  live  stock  and  of 
the  year's  increase."  The  same  payment  is  enjoined 
by  Edmund's  law  of  940.  The  laws  passed  by  Ina^ 
and  his  Witan  in  693  enforce  on  every  house  an  as- 
sessment called  "  cyric-sceat,"  or  "  church-scot,"  to 
defray  the  expenses  of  divine  service.  Church-scot 
was  to  be  paid  in  kind  every  Martinmas.  This  impost 
is  enforced  by  many  subsequent  legislative  acts  of  the 
period.  "  Leohtsceat  "  and  "  sawlsceat  "  were  the  names 
of  certain  other  dues  payable  to  the  Church.  If  we 
except  the  hide  of  glebe  land  sometimes  attached  to  the 
Church  for  the  maintenance  of  the  parish  priest,  eccle- 
siastical property  of  every  kind  was  in  the  hands  of 
the  bishop.  The  dues  above  mentioned  did  not  accrue 
directly  to  the  clergy.  They  fed  a  diocesan  fund, 
which  was  apportioned  by  the  bishop  according  to  fixed 
rules.  The  usual  custom  of  the  Eoman  Church  was  to 
divide  all  oblations  into  four  parts — one  for  the  bishop, 
one  for  the  clergy,  one  for  the  poor,  and  one  for  the 
repairs  and  ornamentation  of  the  church.  In  England 
usually  a  tripartite  ^  division  obtained,  one-third  being 
allotted  to  the  bishop  and  clergy.     This  arrangement 


'  See  Theodore,  Poenit.,  lib.  ii.  2,  and  ii.  14. 
'  LL.  Inse,  4, 10  ;  Spelm.,  i.  184,  185.  *  Excerpta  Egberti,  5. 


THE  NATIONAL  ANGLO-SAXON  CHURCH.    45 

appears  to  be  accounted  for  by  the  monastic  character  of     chap. 
the  early  bishops.  Gregory  expressly  directed  Augustine     -— — 
to  make,  not  four,  but  three  portions,  because  he,  being 
a  monk,  could  have  no  separate  share  of  his  own. 

The  formation  of  parishes  has  been  already  alluded  The  parish 

...  .  church. 

to.  Here  again  Christianity  was  interwoven  with  the 
existent  secular  institutions  of  Anglo-Saxon  England, 
the  parish  being  only  one  or  more  of  the  already  defined 
townships.  The  "  monasterium  "  or  episcopal  church 
served  as  a  kind  of  missionary  depot.  Its  travelling 
preachers  were  gradually  transformed  into  parish 
priests,  "  presbyteri  plebei,"  as  provision  was  secured 
for  the  maintenance  of  a  resident  clergy.  This  change 
doubtless  went  on  briskly  under  Theodore's  regime. 
Hence,  perhaps,  the  legend  that  he  introduced  the 
parochial  system  into  England  from  the  East.  In  the 
time  of  Bede  parish  churches  had  been  generally  estab- 
lished throughout  England.  Mr.  Kemble  accounts  for 
this  speedy  upgrowth  by  the  supposition  that  in  most 
cases  the  heathen  temple  (the  fanum  or  liearli)  was 
appropriated  to   Christian  use.      In  this  connection  it  Treatment 

Ox  xl63/Ui3.611 

may  be  observed  that  heathen  practices  were  to  some  practices, 
extent  incorporated  in  the  Christianity  of  Anglo-Saxon 
England.  The  most  remarkable  survival  is  that  of  the 
"  ordeal''  This  relic  of  Teutonic  superstition  was 
condemned  by  Pope  Stephen  V.  in  the  ninth  century, 
and  again  by  Alexander  II.  in  the  eleventh.  But  in 
England  no  active  measures  for  its  suppression  ^  were 
taken  until  the  reign  of  Henry  III.  Other  ancient  prac- 
tices, however,  deemed  of  a  less  innocent  character,  were 
jealously  proscribed.  The  Saxon  rules  with  regard  to 
prohibited  degrees  of  marriage  had  been  so  indulgent 
that  union  with  a  widowed  stepmother  was  a  common 

'  See  Johnson,  sub  an.  1065,  can.  2. 


46 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


CHAP. 
III. 


practice.  The  matrimonial  restrictions  introduced  by 
Christianity  must  therefore  have  been  often  found  an 
intolerable  burden.  The  Church  forbade  marriage 
within  four  degrees  of  consanguinity,  or  with  sponsors, 
nuns,  or  divorced  women.  It  also  discouraged  second 
marriages.  The  zeal  of  the  prelates  in  enforcing  these 
proviisions  is  illustrated  by  the  episode  of  Odo  and  the 
unfortunate  Elgiva.  It  was  perhaps  to  guard  against 
some  barbarous  practice  of  the  old  religion  that  the 
Anglo-Saxon  canons  maintained  the  primitive  prohibi- 
tions with  regard  to  tasting  of  blood  or  of  strangled 
animals.-^ 

The  ritual,  and  the  doctrinal  tenets  of  the  Anglo- 
Saxon  Christians  were,  broadly,  such  as  prevailed  among 
their  contemporaries  at  Eome.  Latin  was  the  language 
of  public  worship.  The  priest  was  ordained  to  "  offer 
sacrifice  and  celebrate  mass  as  well  for  the  living  as  for 
Celibacy  of  the  dead."  Celibacy  was  theoretically  the  rule  of  life  for 
c  ergy.  ^^^  parochial  clergy  as  well  as  for  the  monks ;  but  the 
denunciations  of  Boniface  in  the  eighth,  and  Dunstan 
in  the  tenth  century,  were  vainly  launched  against  the 
Penitential  prevalent  contrary  practice.^  The  Anglo-Saxon  divines 
are  prolific  sources  of  instruction  on  the  subject  of 
penance.  Theodore's  bulky  Penitential  was  succeeded 
by  the  similar  productions  of  Archbishop  Egbert, 
Cummian,  and  Elfric.  Every  conceivable  form  of  sin 
is  assessed  in  these  works,  to  be  commuted  by  a  pro- 
portionate  fasting,   money  payment,   or   repetition  of 


Doctrines 
oftlie 
Anglo- 
Saxon 
Churcli. 


system. 


'  Egbert's  Penitential :  see  Johnson's  Collection,  i.  can.  40  ;  Wilkins,  i.  124. 

^  Wilfrid's  son  is  mentioned  by  Eddius.  A  church  is  left  hereditarily  to  Wulf- 
maer  and  his  offspring :  the  sons  of  Bishop  iElfsige,  Oswald  the  presbyter,  and 
other  clerics  are  mentioned.  Mr.  Kemble  concludes  that  there  is  •'  an  almost  un- 
broken chain  of  evidence  to  show  that,  in  spite  of  the  exhortations  of  the  bishops 
and  the  legislation  of  the  Witan,  those -at  least  of  the  clergy  who  were  not  bound 
to  coenobitical  order  did  contract  marriage  and  openly  rear  the  families  which  were 
its  issue." — Saxons  in  England,  vol.  ii.  p.  443. 


THE  NATIONAL  ANGLO-SAXON  CHURCH.    47 

psalms.  Tlie  apology  for  such  a  system  was  the  chap. 
hardened  spiritual  condition  of  the  Anglo-Saxons,  who  ^^^^~. 
were,  as  we  have  shown,  notorious  abroad  for  violence 
and  inhumanity.  It  need  not  be  remarked  what  a  scope 
it  offered  for  abuse.  Rome  was  regarded  as  the  centre 
of  Christendom,  and,  as  a  rule,  dutifully  obeyed.  Two 
notable  exceptions  may  be  alleged.  Image-worship 
and  transubstantiation,  as  will  be  shown  hereafter,  were 
both  rejected  by  the  Church  of  England,  despite  the 
sanction  they  received  from  Rome. 

The    eighth    century    is    the    golden    age    of    the  The  age  of 
Anglo-Saxon  period.     At  Benedict  Biscop's  colleges  at  writers. 
Wearmouth  and  Jarrow   was  educated  the  theologian 
and  historian  Bede,  called  by  the  succeeding  generation  Bede. 
"  venerabilis."     The  celebrity  of  Bede  was  such  as  to 
justify  a  tradition  that  Pope  Sergius  invited  him  to 
give  Rome  the  benefit  of  his  erudition.     To  modern 
readers  Bede's   theological   works  are   of  little  value. 
They  are  merely  excerpts   from   the   great  Christian 
Fathers,  to  whom  we  have,  what  Bede's  countrymen 
had  not,  a  more  direct  means  of  access.    Just  as  Jerome 
had  thrown  open  the   Scriptures  to  the   less  learned 
minds    of    Western    Christendom,    so    Bede    revealed 
S.  Augustine  to  Saxon  England.     Standing  aloof  alike 
from   ecclesiastical   duties   and   ecclesiastical  disputes, 
the  monk  of  Jarrow  made  it  his  life's  work  to  master, 
and  to  disseminate  in  his  writings,  the  literary  trea- 
sures  accumulated   by  Wilfrid    and  Benedict   Biscop. 
Posterity,    however,    has    forgotten    Saxon    England's 
obligations  to  Bede  as  an  exponent  of  patristic  thought. 
His  fame  now  rests  on  what  bis  contemporaries  probably 
considered  his  least  valuable  work,  the  Ecclesiastical 
History  of  England.     To  this  record,  compiled  from 
ancient    records,    tradition,   and   personal   knowledge, 


48 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


CHAP. 
III. 


Egbert  of 
York. 


Csedmon 
the  poet. 


we  are  indebted  for  almost  all  that  we  know  of  the 
Eno-land  of  the  sixth  and  seventh  centuries.  Bede 
died  in  the  act  of  completing  a  vernacular  translation 
of  S.  John's  Gospel  (735). 

To  Bede's  learned  friend,  Archbishop  Egbert  of  York, 
we  have  already  alluded,  as  the  founder  of  a  valuable 
library  and  author  of  a  vernacular  Penitential.  It  is 
important  to  notice  that  Egbert's  episcopate  restored 
York  to  the  metropolitan  dignity,  to  which  it  had  made 
no  pretensions  since  the  death  of  Paulinus.  It  may  be 
conceived  that  the  high  connections  of  Egbert,  whose 
brother  Edbert  was  King  of  Northumbria,  helped  to 
secure  him  this  dignity.  Egbert's  prelacy  lasted  from 
732  to  706.  Of  Csedmon,  the  greatest  of  Anglo-Saxon 
poets,  and  his  sudden  acquisition  of  a  talent  for  which 
he  had  no  natural  bent,  we  are  told  by  Bede,  who  was 
not  many  years  his  senior.  Caedmon's  lips  were 
opened  by  an  angel,  who  bid  him  sing  of  the  "  Creation." 
In  language  in  which  his  countrymen  saw  a  beauty 
which  they  attributed  to  inspiration,  Caedmon  poured 
forth  "  the  treasures  of  Biblical  poetry,  the  sublime 
mysteries  of  the  Creation,  the  Fall,  the  wonders  of  the 
Hebrew  history,  the  gentler  miracles  of  the  New- 
Testament,  the  terrors  of  the  judgment,  the  torments 
of  hell,  the  bliss  of  heaven.  .  .  .  Thus  was  the  whole 
history  of  the  Bible,  and  the  whole  creed  of  Christianity 
in  the  imaginative  form  which  it  then  wore,  made  at 
once  accessible  to  the  Anglo-Saxon  people.^  Casdmon's 
poetry  was  their  Bible,  no  doubt  far  more  effective  in 
awakening  and  changing  the  popular  mind  than  a  literal 
translation  of  the  Scriptures  could  have  been."  ^     In 

'  Probably  at  a  later  time  vernacular  translations  of  most  of  the  Scriptures  were 
executed.  The  Gospels  were  certainly  translated  more  than  once,  as  also  the 
Psalms.  Elfric  translated  the  Pentateuch  and  the  historical  Books  of  the  Old 
Testament.  *  Milman,  Lat.  Christ.,  vol.  ii.  pp.  Ill,  278. 


THE  NATIONAL  ANGLO-SAXON  CHURCH.    49 

like  manner  the  unimpressive  sermons  of  tlie  clergy 
were  supplemented  by  the  improvised  utterances  of  the 
poet-preacher,  Aldhelm  of  Malmesbury.  Unfortunately  Aicmeim. 
for  his  reputation,  Aldhelm  also  attempted  Latin  verses, 
and  these  are  all  that  survive  of  his  poetical  productions. 
Alcuin,  the  scholar  and  statesman,  emerges  from  Aicuin. 
Egbert's  college  at  York,  as  Bede  does  from  the  foun- 
dations of  Benedict,  acd  aspired  to  yet  loftier  rank 
among  the  Anglo-Saxon  worthies.     Alcuin  made  his  < 

Alma  Mater  so  famous  by  his  own  talent  for  oral  tuition 
that  York  was  the  resort  of  the  theological  students  of 
the  Continent.  His  friend  and  former  pupil,  Eanbald, 
when  raised  to  the  see  of  York,  desired  Alcuin  to 
procure  him  the  pall  at  Eome.  The  journey  was 
destined  to  sever  England's  connection  with  the  great 
luminary  of  the  age.  At  Parma  Alcuin  was  presented 
to  Charlemagne,  who  contrived  to  secure  his  future 
residence  at  the  Frankish  court.  As  the  privy  coun- 
cillor of  the  emperor,  Alcuin  made  his  influence  felt 
over  all  Europe.  Once  only  was  he  permitted  to  revisit 
England.  His  ostensible  mission  was  to  negotiate  a 
treaty  between  Charlemagne  and  Ofifa ;  but  he  prolonged 
his  stay  three  years,  in  spite  of  the  emperor's  remon- 
strances. In  his  old  age  Alcuin  with  difficulty  obtained  a.d.796. 
permission  to  retire  to  the  abbey  of  S.  Martin's  at 
Tours,  and  devote  himself  to  scholarly  pursuits.  To 
Tours  ^  flocked  students  of  all  countries;  and  as  an 
authority  in  all  branches  of  learning,  Alcuin  survived 
for  centuries.  As  the  author  of  the  so-called  Caroline 
Books,  Alcuin  renders  imj)ortant  testimony  to  the 
opinions  of  the  Saxon  and  Gallican  Churches  on  the 
controverted  subject  of  image- worship. 

Besides  these  men  of  letters  the  English  Church  pro-  And  great 

1  Acta  SS.  Ord.  Benedict.,  iv.  169,  173. 

E 


50 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


CHAP. 
III. 


mission- 
aries 


diTced  at  least  two  celebrated  missionaries.  Willibrord, 
with  a  band  of  preachers,  brought  the  light  of  Chris- 
tianity to  the  barbarous  Batavian  tribes  at  the  close  of 

wiuibrord.  the  scventli  century,  and  established  a  see  at  Utrecht. 

Boniface.  Winifrid,  or  Boniface,  the  "  Apostle  of  Germany,"  was 
born  at  Crediton  in  Devonshire,  where  he  received  a 
monastic  education.  Following  the  example  of  Willi- 
brord, he  passed  over  into  Friesland  in  715.  After 
attaining  considerable  success,  he  journeyed  to  Eome, 
and  received  a  formal  commission  to  work  as  an  itinerant 
missionary  among  the  heathen  tribes  of  Northern 
Europe.  On  this  occasion  he  took  an  oath  of  allegiance 
to  Gregory  II.  as  sole  and  absolute  head  of  the  Church. 
In  738  he  was  consecrated  Archbishop  of  Mentz,  with 
the  appellation  Boniface.  A  devoted  servant  of  Eome, 
he  procured  the  sy nodical  submission  of  Germany  to 
the  papal  see,  and  endeavoured  to  win  over  England  to 
a  like  obedience.  Writing  to  Archbishop  Cuthbert, 
Boniface  styles  himself  legate  of  the  Catholic  and 
Apostolic  Eoman  Churcb,  and  details  how  the  synod 
at  Soissons  had  decided  that  every  metropolitan  must 
appl}^  to  Eome  for  a  pall,  and  "that  in  all  things  we 
must  strive  to  pay  canonical  obedience  to  the  household 
of  S.  Peter."  The  relapse  of  his  converts  appears  to 
have  drawn  Boniface  back  to  Friesland  in  his  old  age. 
There  he  was  murdered  in  755. 

But  it  was  in  the  self-seclusion  of  the  monk  and  the 
laborious  journeyings  of  the  pilgrim  that  the  religious 
enthusiasm  of  this  period  commonly  found  expression. 
The  instances  of  Anglo-Saxon  princes  and  princesses 
who  exchanged  the  court  for  the  cloister  are  too 
numerous  to  be  detailed.  Ceolwulf  of  Northumbria 
(cir.  725)  is  said  to  have  been  the  eighth  king  who 
assumed  the  monastic  garb,  and  the  fashion  became  yet 


Mania  for 

monasti- 

cism. 


THE  NATIONAL  ANGLO-SAXON  CHURCH.     51 

more   prevalent.     The   Benedictine  form  of  establish-      chap. 
ment  had  lono;  been  known  in  Eno-land :  to  this  order     -^-^-1^ 
belonged  Biscop's   foundation  at  Wearmouth,  that  of 
Cuthbert  at  Lindisfarne,  and  the   monastery  wherein 
Winifrid  received  his  education.     Dunstan,  whom  his 
monkish    panegyrists    style  the    first    of  the   English 
Benedictines,  really  did  but  restore  a  system  which  had 
been  overthrown  amid  the  troubles  of  the  Danish  occu- 
pation.    The  female  pilgrims  from  England  obtained  ^ndpii. 
an  unenviable  notoriety  in  continental  cities.     So  in-  primages, 
decent  was  their  behaviour,  that  Boniface  ■"■  wrote   to 
England,  asking  that  the  practice  of  going  on  pilgri- 
mage   should     be    limited    by    royal    and    synodical 
authority. 

It  was  in  deference  to  the  wishes  of  Boniface  that  counsel  of 
the  Council  of  747  was  held  at  Cloveshoo.  Canons  were  ^^^74?°' 
passed  similar  to  those  enforced  by  the  missionary 
bishop  on  his  German  converts.  It  was  enacted  that 
the  people  should  learn  the  Creed  and  the  Lord's  Prayer 
in  the  vulgar  tongue,  and  receive  instruction  as  to  the 
nature  of  the  two  sacraments ;  prayers  were  to  be  used 
for  the  dead ;  bishops  were  to  visit  their  dioceses 
annually.  A  general  conformity  with  the  usages  of 
Rome  is  enjoined  ;  but  that  submission  to  papal  authority 
which  Boniface  had  urged,  and  which  was  recom- 
mended by  Archbishop  Cuthbert,  was  not  expressed. 
On  the  contrary,  no  higher  court  of  appeal  than  that 
of  the  archbishop  in  synod  is  acknowledged. 

This  submission  was,  however,  rendered  in  787  byThearch- 
Offa,  King  of  the  Mercians,  in  furtherance  of  Iris  own  otLichfieici 
ambition.     While  a  bishop  ranked  only  as  an  ealdorman,  b^^^o^^*^^ 
the  archbishops  held  the  rank  of  athelings  or  princes 
of  the  blood,  and  had  the  right  to  issue  coinage.     It 

'  See  Spelm.,  Cone,  i.  233  ;  Wilk.,  i.  88. 


52 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


CHAP. 
III. 


A.D.  787. 


was  natural  that  when  Offa  conquered  Kent,  he  should 
deem  it  politic  to  curtail  the  dignity  and  authority  of 
the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  by  establishing  a  third 
archiepiscopate  in  his  own  kingdom  of  Mercia.  The 
new  archbishopric  of  Lichfield  survived  for  about  twenty 
years.  Papal  connivance,  and  a  pall  for  the  new  metro- 
politan were  obtained  by  enormous  bribes ;  ^  and  prob- 
ably the  recognition  of  the  pall  as  an  essential  was,  at 
this  time,  even  more  grateful  to  Eome  than  the  money 
payment.  Two  legates — the  first  papal  commissioners 
since  the  appointment  of  Theodore — were  sent  to 
ratifj''  the  new  arrangement,  which  also  received  the 
approval  of  a  Council  held  at  Calcuith.^  Offa  promised 
the  legates  that  he  would  subscribe  annually  to  a  fund 
for  supporting  the  English  college  founded  by  Ina  at 
Eome  and  defraying  the  expenses  of  pilgrims.  The 
subscription  was  levied  by  a  tax  of  a  penny  on  every 
family  not  absolutely  destitute  in  his  dominions.  In 
this  grant  originated  "Peter's  pence,"  claimed  from 
William  I.  after  the  Conquest  by  Pope  Gregory  VII., 
and  paid  with  occasional  interruptions  until  its  final 
abrogation  in  1559. 
England  ^   Controversy  as  to  the   kind  of  devotion  due  to 

and  the        gacred   imasres   had  been  menacing  Christendom  from 

iconoclastic  °  .  . 

theory.  \\^q  time  of  Gregory  I.  This  Pope,  with  his  usual 
sagacity,  had  sanctioned  the  use  of  images,  while  depre- 
cating their  worship.  Sweeping  condemnation  of  such 
stimulants  to  devotion  was  the  platform  of  Leo  the 
Isaurian,  and  his  son  Constantino  Copronymus,  whose 
opinions  were  espoused  by  a  Council  at  Constantinople, 
in  754.    The  Empress  Irene,  on  the  other  hand,  reversed 


Peter's 
pence. 


'  "  Data  pecunia  infinita,  a  sede  Apostolica,  qu(z  nulli  deestpecuniam  largiente 
licentiam  inipctravit."— Matt.  Paris,  Hist.  Aug.,  p.  155. 
?  "  Challoch  or  Chalk  in  Kent,"  according  to  Dr.  Ingram. 


THE  NATIONAL  ANGLO-SAXON  CHURCH,     53 

this  policy.  Through  her  instrumentality  the  second  chap. 
Council  of  Nicaea  was  summoned  to  enact  that  an  ex-  .  ™-_. 
ternal  and  inferior  sort  of  worship  might  be  offered  to 
images  (787).  The  Roman  see  emphatically  pro- 
nounced in  favour  of  image-worship.  It  is  certain  that 
the  English  and  Galilean  Churches  were  in  this  matter 
at  variance  with  Rome.  Under  Charlemagne,  the  cele- 
brated Council  of  Frankfort,  794,  condemned  the  Council  a.d.  794. 
of  Nicsea  as  a  pseudo-synod,  and  the  decrees  of  this 
Council  were  transmitted  to  the  Anglo-Saxon  clergy. 
By  them  the  practice  of  image-worship  was  absolutely 
repudiated,  as  being  "  that  which  God's  Church  alto- 
gether execrates."  ^  The  views  of  the  two  Churches 
were  defended  by  Alcuin  in  a  treatise  surviving  in  the 
so-called  Caroline  Books.  While  preserving  the  great- 
est deference  to  Rome  as  the  metropolis  of  Christendom, 
the  author  plainly  proscribes  image-worship  as  an 
insidious  relic  of  paganism. 

The  ninth  century  introduced  a  great  political  change  P^°^  °^ . 
in  the  consolidation  of  the  various  principalities  under  pauties. 
one  ruler.     Egbert,  who  ruled  over  England  south  of 
the  Humber  (827),  was  succeeded  by  Ethel wulf,  who 
is  the  reputed  author  of  the  legislation  which  subjected 
the  whole  country  to  tithe-payment.     It  appears,  how-  a.d.  854. 
ever,  that  Ethelwulf 's  enactments  did  no  more  than  free 
Church  property  from  a  tenth  part  of  the  usual  im- 
posts,^ and  that  the  earliest  distinct  legislation   as  to 
tithe-payment   is    that    of   Athelstan,  sixty-six    years 
later.   Ethelwulf  journeyed  to  Rome,  and  there  restored 
the  English  school  founded  by  Ina,  which  had  been 
destroyed  by  fire.     He  appears   to  have   renewed   or 
confirmed  the  grant  of  Peter's  pence.     The  religious 

1  For  the  canons  of  this  synod  see  Spelm.,  Cone,  vii.  103. 

"  See  Stubbs,  Const.  Hist.,  i.  228,  237 ;  and  Kemble,  Saxons,  ii.  481-490. 


54 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


CHAP.      prosperity  of  England  was  rudely  sliaken  during  this 

_ii.^.:_     reign  by  the  invasions  of  the  Northmen.     Civilization 

The  Church  liad  enervated  her   soldiers,  and  little  resistance  was 

shaken  by  . 

the  Danish  made  Until  resistance  was  useless.  In  the  troublous 
period  which  ensued  the  Christian  institutions  of  the 
island  were  wellnigh  exterminated.  Bishops  and 
clergy  fled  from  their  benefices ;  literature  and  peaceful 
arts  succumbed;  the  religious  houses,  especially  those 
of  Northern  England,  were  pillaged  or  destroyed.  In 
seven  years,  it  is  said,  every  religious  house  in  North- 
umbria  had  ceased  to  exist.     The  work  of  restoration 

A.D  878  consequent  on  Alfred's  great  victory  at  Ethandune  in- 
cluded a  re-establishment  of  the  ancient  territorial 
divisions — shires,  hundreds,  and  parishes  ;  a  compulsory 
baptism  of  the  heathen ;  the  founding  of  schools  and 
colleges ;  the  translation  of  portions  of  the  Scriptures 
and  other  religious  books  into  the  native  tongue ;  the 
manumission  of  slaves ;  and  a  general  enforcement  of 
the  tenets  and  practice  of  Christianity  on  the  lines  of 

Alfred.  Offa  and  Ina.  Alfred  prefaces  his  laws  with  a  version 
of  the  Decalogue,  in  which  the  second  commandment 
is  omitted.  From  this  it  is  inferred  that  England  no 
longer  reprobated  the  second  Council  of  Nic^a.  It  is 
also  noteworthy  that  Alfred  stipulated  for  the  payment 
of  Bome-sceat  in  the  laws  which  enjoin  the  usual 
offerings  for  the  maintenance  of  the  clergy.  But  the 
tradition  of  his  patronage  of  John  Scotus  Erigena,  who 
was  deemed  heterodox  at  Eome,  indicates  that  his 
deference  to  the  papal  see  was  not  extravagant.  This 
divine  was  the  only  great  writer  produced  by  these 
islands  in  the  ninth  century.  He  appears  to  have 
been  born  in  Ireland,  and  to  have  spent  his  earlier 
years  in  France,  under  the  patronage  of  Charles  the 
Bald.      By   Charles   he  was   employed  with   Hatramn 


THE  NATIONAL  ANGLO-SAXON  CHURCH.     55 

to  examine  the  doctrine  of  transubstantiation  lately 
broached  by  Paschasius  Radbertiis.  Both  scholars 
condemned  the  doctrine.  This,  together  with  his 
peculiar  views  on  the  subject  of  predestination,  brought 
Erigena  into  disrepute  at  Eome.  At  Alfred's  summons 
he  accepted  a  post  as  teacher  at  the  newly  founded 
school  at  Oxford.  Thence  he  moved  to  Malmesbury 
Abbey,  where  he  continued  to  engage  in  tuition.  He 
died  by  the  penknives  of  his  pupils,^  who  are  sup- 
posed to  have  been  incited  by  some  of  his  theological 
antagonists. 

The    doctrine   which    Erigena    repudiated   will    be  The  dogrma 

^  ^  oftransub- 

frequently  alluded  to  hereafter,  and  the  present  stantiation. 
appears  a  suitable  place  for  an  account  of  it.  From 
the  earliest  times  it  had  been  held  that  there  was  a 
veritable  but  mysterious  Presence  of  Christ  in  the 
Sacrament  of  the  Eucharist.  On  this  subject  all  the 
Fathers  are  in  agreement.  Seldom,  however,  was  it 
attempted  to  define  the  nature  of  Sacramental  grace 
dogmatically.  In  the  liturgies  of  SS.  Basil  and 
Chrysostom  this  Presence  is  regarded  as  so  real  as  to 
give  to  the  Eucharistic  rite  a  sacrificial  character.^  In 
787  the  second  Council  of  Nice  determined  that  the 
symbols  are  not  figures  or  images,  but  the  very  Body 
and  Blood.  Paschasius  Radbertus  (831)  appears  to  have  a.d.  ssi. 
combined  the  doctrine  of  a  Eeal  Presence  with  the 
philosophical  tenet  of  the  times, — that  in  all  bodies 
there  existed  a  substance  apart  from  the  accidents  appre- 
ciable by  the  senses.  His  followers  maintained  that 
after  the  act  of  consecration  the  substance  of  the 
sacred  elements  was  changed,  albeit  the  accidents  re- 
mained. This  view  was  opposed  by  Erigena,  Ratramn 
a  learned  monk  of   Corbey   in   France,  and  Rabanus 

'  Malmesb.  Script,  post  Bed,  24.        -  See  also  Cbrysost.,  De  Sacerdot.,  iii.  $  4. 


56 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


CHAP. 
III. 


The  False 
Decretals. 


Maurns,  a  disciple  of  Alcuin.  Elfiic,  the  Anglo-Saxon 
homilist  (cir.  995),  sa3^s  distinct!}^  that  the  conse- 
crated elements  "  are  not  the  same  body  that  Christ 
suftiered  in,  nor  the  same  blood  in  bodily  substance  that 
He  shed  for  us ; "  and  during  the  Anglo-Saxon  period 
our  Church  appears  to  have  rejected  the  rationalistic 
dogma  of  Eadbertus.  In  the  Gallican  Clmrch  Beren- 
garius  (cir.  1050),  while  admitting  the  Keal  Presence 
in  the  sacrament,  argued  that  the  bread  and  wine  re- 
tained their  natural  substance.  But  the  dogma  of 
"  tran substantiation  "  (a  term  first  applied  about  1100) 
had  throughout  the  controversy  been  supported  by 
Eome.  A  Council  at  Yerceil,  under  Leo  IX.,  con- 
demned John  Scotus  and  Berengarius  (1050).  Councils 
held  shortly  afterwards  at  Eome  endorsed  the  verdict ; 
and  among  those  who  endeavoured  to  confute  Beren- 
garius in  writing  was  Lanfranc,  afterwards  primate  of 
England.  From  this  time  the  dogma  was  generally 
received.^  It  was  formally  declared  to  be  an  article  of 
faith  by  the  fourth  Lateran  Council  under  Innocent  III. 
(a.d.  1215). 

Before  the  middle  of  the  ninth  century  the  False 
Decretals  were  published  by  some  Gallican  ecclesiastic 
eager  to  aggrandize  Eome.  A  collection  of  papal  canons 
and  decretals  from  the  pontificate  of  Siricius  to  his 
own  time,  i.e.  384-525,  had  been  made  by  Dionysius 
the  Less.  Isidore  of  Seville  had,  in  635,  undertaken 
to  revise  and  complete  this  collection.  The  forged 
decretals,  which  first  saw  light  about  836,  profess 
to  be  the  work  of  Isidore.  They  trace  back  the  decretal 
epistles  of  Popes,  not  to  Siricius,  but  to  a  period  when 


1  When  in  this  worlc  we  use  the  term  "  transubstantiation  "  we  mean  this 
rationalistic  dogma  of  Radbertus,  and  not,  as  some  writers,  the  ancient  doctrine  of 
a  real,  if  undefinable,  Presence. 


THE  NATIONAL  ANGLO-SAXON  CHURCH.      57 

no  papal  decrees  were  dreamt  of;  in  fact,  to  the  days  chap. 
of  Clement,  Bishop  of  Rome  (a.d.  91).  The  False  ^I^ 
Decretals  also  contain  the  so-called  Donation  of  Con-  ^■'^-  sse. 
stantine.  Pope  Sylvester  is  herein  endowed  by 
Constantino  the  Great  with  the  empire  of  Italy  and 
the  West,  the  donor  at  the  same  time  confessing  the 
dependence  of  all  power,  whether  ecclesiastical  or  civil, 
on  the  j^apal  see.  The  Church  of  Rome  is  declared  to 
be  constituted  as  head  over  other  Churches  by  our  Lord 
Himself.  The  clergy  are  said  to  be  exempt  from  secular 
control,  and  to  be  responsible  only  to  their  diocesans ; 
these  in  turn  are  subject  to  their  metropolitans,  and 
these  to  the  patriarchs,  at  the  head  of  whom  is  the 
successor  of  Peter.  The  False  Decretals,  though  now 
acknowledged  to  be  a  clumsy  forgery,  teeming  with 
anachronisms,  were  universally  acce^Dted  in  the  Middle 
Ages,  and  were  of  great  influence  in  establishing  the 
papal  supremacy.  Nicholas  I.  is  the  first  Pope  who 
refers  to  them  as  authorities.  Hildebrand,  in  the 
eleventh  century,  was  the  first  to  deduce  from  them 
that  system  of  papal  tyranny  in  which  originated  most 
of  the  evils  of  mediaeval  Christianity. 

During  the  troublous  period  preceding  the  reign  of  conflict 
Alfred   the   regulars   or   monastic   clergy   had  almost  regulars 
vanished  from   the   land.     When   order  was  restored,  f^g^®*^^" 
many  of  the  religious  houses  became  the  habitation 
of  a  clergy  who  did  not  acknowledge  the  Benedictine 
rule,  and  some  of  whom  were  married  men.     Against 
such  laxity  of  discipline  strict  religionists  raised  ^  an 
outcry.     The  Church  was  soon   divided   between  two 

'  The  same  anomaly  had  vexed  the  divines  assembled  at  Cloveshoo  in  747. 
"  It  is  necessary  for  bishops  to  go  to  monasteries,  if  they  can  be  called  monasteries 
which  in  these  times  cannot  be  in  any  wise  reformed  according  to  the  model  of 
Christianity,  .  .  .  which  are,  we  know  not  how,  possessed  by  secular  men." — Coac. 
Cloves.,  can.  5.    Spelm.  i.  247. 


58^  ECCLESM  ANGLICANA. 

CHAP,     parties,  the  secular  and  tlie  monastic.     Supported  by 
v^Jil_     the   approval  of  Eome,   the  monastic  party  not  only 

A.D.900-  recovered  their  just  rights,  but  began  to  intrench  upon 
those  of  the  seculars.  An  atteinj)t  was  made  to  oust 
the  seculars — especially  such  as  had  married — from  the 
cathedral  chapters,  even  from  the  livings.  The  an- 
tagonism between  the  two  kinds  of  religionists,  we 
may  here  remark,  was  a  continual  source  of  disturb- 
ance until  the  Reformation.  The  regulars  were  always 
backed  up  by  the  papal  see,  which,  by  alienating  them 
from  their  compatriots  and  exempting  them  from 
episcopal  control,  used  them  as  tools  to  weaken  the 
influence  of  the  national  Church.  Two  successive 
primates  in  the  tenth  century  warmly  supported  the 
cause  of  the  regulars. 

Little  is  known  of  the  earlier  English  monasteries — 
so  little  that,  though  the  Benedictine  rule  was  certainly 
known  in  England  shortly  after  the  j)rimacy  of  Theo- 
dore, its  introduction  has  often  been  attributed  to  Odo 
and  Dunstan.^  The  task  of  these  distinguished  eccle- 
siastics was  really  perhaj)s  one  more  arduous — that  of 
re-establishing  a  system  which  had  been  secularized 
and  sapped,  and  extending   it   beyond   its   legitimate 

Odo.  sphere.     Odo  was  of  Danish  blood  and  heathen  parent- 

age. Before  his  translation  to  Canterbury  he  appears 
to  have  filled  the  see  of  Eamsbury.  It  was  probably 
at  his  friend  Dunstan's  instigation  that  he  proceeded, 
before  his  promotion,  to  the  celebrated  Benedictine 
establishment  at  Fleury,^  and  returned  a  monk.  For- 
saking the  party  of  the  secular  clergy,  to  which  he 
had  hitherto  belonged,  he  thus  "  expressed  his  opinion 
that  no  one  was  fit  to  be  an  archbishop  unless  he  had 

1  Dunstan  is  called  "  rater_monacborum  et  sidus  Auglorum." — Brompton  X., 
Script.  877.  ~  -  Ibid.,  863. 


A.D.  942. 


THE  NATIONAL  ANGLO-SAXON  CHURCH.      59 

first  become  a  monk — one  of  the  religious."  ^     Three     chap. 
great   measures   of  reform  monopolized  this  primate's     — ^ 
thoughts,  and  were  executed  with  pitiless  assiduity — 
the  enforcement  of  the  Benedictine  rule  in  all  mon- 
asteries;   the   separation  of  the   married  clergy  from- 
their  wives;    and  the  expulsion  of  the  secular  clergy 
from  the  cathedral   chapters.     To  Odo's   canons,  pro- 
hibiting marriage  within  certain  degrees,  King  Edwy 
was  obliged  to  submit.    The  archbishop's  retinue  forced 
the  queen,  Elgiva,  from  his  palace,  and,  lest  her  beaut}^ 
should  weaken  his  resolution,  branded  her  on  the  face. 
Despite  or  in  consequence  of  such  acts  of  brutality,  the 
archbishop  was  known  to  monastic  historians  as  "  Odo- 
the  Good."  ^     Contemporaries  gave  him  the  less  flatter- 
ing epithet,  "  Odo^  Severus."     Dunstan,  the  friend  and  uunstan. 
successor   of    Odo,    was   more    gentle   in   temper   and     •^•®^^- 
infinitely  superior  in  talent.     A  statesman  as  well  as 
an  ecclesiastic,  his  influence  in  the  secular  history  of 
his   time    may   be   compared   to   that    of    Wolsey   or 
Eichelieu  in  subsequent  ages.     Born  of  good  parentage, 
Dunstan  was  educated  in  a  noted  monastery  at  Glaston- 
bur3\     Here,   acsording   to   his   monkish   biographers, 
youthful  visions  predicted  to  him  his  future  task  of 
restoring  the  Benedictine  discipline.     His  introduction 
to  the  court  of  Athelsta,n  was  succeeded  by  an  enjoy- 
ment of  royal  favour  which  provoked  jealousy.     His 
enemies  accused  him  of  proficiency  in  magic,   and  he 
was  ignominiously  expelled  from  the  royal  presence. 
Disappointment  and  illness  led  him  to  Fleury,  whence 
he  returned  an  ardent   champion  of  the   Benedictine 
system.      He   persuaded  Edmund    to   endow   a   Bene- 
dictine monastery  at  Glastonbury  after  the  model  of 
Fleury,  where  he  himself  presided  as  abbot.     Without 

1  Hook,  Archbishops,  vol.  i.,  "  Odo."         *  See  Malmesb.  Script,  post  Bed.,  115. 


6o 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


CHAP. 
III. 


Elfric  the 
homilist. 


resigning  this  office,  he  became  bishop  both  of  Worcester 
and  London.  Edwy  and  the  anti-monastic  party  were 
unable  to  exclude  him  from  the  secular  administration  ; 
and,  with  Odo  at  Canterbury,  Dunstan  was  already  the 
guiding  spirit  in  ecclesiastical  matters.  The  deaths  of 
Odo  and  Edwy  were  almost  contemporaneous.  Edgar 
at  once  installed  Dunstan  at  Canterbury  (959).  The 
work  which  Odo  had  initiated  was  now  brought  to 
a  successful  conclusion.  No  less  than  forty-seven  mon- 
asteries were  founded,  chiefly  at  the  expense  of  the 
secular  clergy.  The  cathedral  chapters  were  purged, 
and  stocked  with  regulars.  Oswald  Bishop  of  Wor- 
cester, and  Ethelwold  Bishop  of  Winchester,  warmly 
sup]3orted  this  innovation ;  and  the  roj^al  guarantee  for 
effecting  it  was  known  as  "  Oswald's  Law."  The 
opposition  of  the  defrauded  canons  was  violent,  but 
when  they  clamoured  for  redress  at  Winchester,  Dun- 
stan contrived  that  the  crucifix  should  utter  a  voice 
of  protest,^  "Absit  hoc  ut  fiat."  By  a  similar  im- 
posture he  awed  his  opponents  at  a  Council  at  Calne. 
In  a  primacy  which  considerably  sapped  the  indepen- 
dence of  the  English  Church  it  is  pleasant  to  witness 
one  instance  of  resistance  to  the  papal  mandates.  An 
earl  whom  Dunstan  had  excommunicated  for  an  in- 
cestuous marriage  obtained  letters  from  Eome  com- 
manding Dunstan  to  grant  absolution.  The  arch- 
bishop flatly  refused  compliance  till  the  sin  should 
be  forsaken  and  penitence  expressed." 

To  the  same  century  as  Dunstan  jDrobably  belongs 
the  great  Saxon  homilist  Elfric,  a  voluminous  writer, 
of  uncertain  date.  To  Elfric  are  ascribed  translations 
of  several  portions  of  the  Scriptures,  eighty  homilies, 


'  Osbern,  De  Vit.  S.  Dunst.,  Angl.  Sacr.,  ii.  112  ;  cf.  Spelm.,  Cone,  ii.  490. 
*  See  Hook,  Archbishops,  vol.  i.  p.  408. 


THE  NATIONAL  ANGLO-SAXON  CHURCH.     6i 

a  book  of  ecclesiastical  laws  and  canons,  and  some  chap. 
hortatory  epistles.  Much  importance  is  attached  to  ,  "^'  , 
these  works,  as  illustrating  the  usages  of  the  Church 
in  England  at  the  close  of  the  Saxon  period.  The 
canons  enumerate  seven  orders  of  clergy,  viz.  the 
08i%ar\j  or  sexton,  the  exorcist,  the  lector  who  read  the  ^"^  ^®^- 
lessons  in  church,  the  acolytJi,  the  suhdeacon  who  per- 
formed subordinate  functions  at  mass,  the  deacon,  and 
the  priest.  Bishops  and  archbishops  were  regarded  as 
leading  members  of  the  priestly  order.  Elfric  directs 
that  consecrated  oil  should  be  sprinkled  on  infants  at 
baptism,  and  on  sick  persons  in  extremis.  He  insists  on 
the  celibacy  of  the  clergy,  and  attaches  much  weight  to 
acts  of  penance  and  to  the  intercession  of  saints. 
Bede  had  considered  purgatory  a  thing  only  not  in- 
credible ;  Elfric  appears  to  have  believed  in  purgatory 
as  efficacious  for  the  cleansing  of  less  perfect  souls. 
As  we  have  before  remarked,  Elfric  is  decidedly  opposed 
to  the  doctrine  of  transubstantiation.^  Perhaps  it  is 
on  this  ground  that  the  historians  of  the  Anglo-Norman 
period,  Osbern  and  William  of  Malmesbury,  tell  us 
so  little  of  the  learned  homilist.  That  he  was  an 
abbot  and  a  bishop  is  gathered  from  his  works,  but 
neither  his  abbey  nor  his  see  can  be  identified.  An 
Elfric  succeeded  to  the  see  of  Canterbury  in  a.d.  995 ; 
another  Elfric  was  appointed  by  Canute  to  the  see 
of  York  in  a.d.  1025.  Dr.  Hook  decides  that  the 
former  is  the  author  of  the  homilies. 

The  succeeding  reigns  contribute  little  material  to 
the  Church  history  of  the  Anglo-Saxon  period.     The  ^^'''^^^■ 
vitality  of  English  Christianity  is  illustrated  by  the 
conversion  of  Canute  the  Dane  from  a  life  of  brutality 

•^    A.D.  1017. 

(1017).     This   occurred  soon  after  his  accession.     His 

^  See  the  Paschal  Homily. 


62 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


CHAP. 
III. 


Edward 
the  Con- 
fessor 
A.D.  1043. 


reign  was  marked  by  numerous  acts  of  piety  and 
beneficence.  A  liberal  supporter  of  the  parochial 
clergy,  as  well  as  of  the  regulars,  Canute  contrived  to 
allay  for  a  time  the  mutual  jealousies  of  the  two  rival 
factions.  A  dangerous  precedent  was,  however,  estab- 
lished in  this  reign  by  the  monarch  assuming  to  him- 
self the  right  of  electing  bishops.  Hitherto  the  clergy 
and  people  had  shared  this  right ;  the  king  had  recom- 
mended the  candidate,  but  this  recommendation  was 
not  necessarily  construed  as  an  order.  From  this 
reign,  too,  the  royal  investiture  of  bishops  by  means 
of  ring  and  crosier — the  practice  so  offensive  to  the 
clergy  of  the  Anglo-Norman  period— is  said  to  date. 

Edward  the  Confessor  is  extolled  by  monkish  writers 
on  account  of  his  preference  for  the  celibate  state. 
There  is  really  little  to  admire  in  his  character ;  and 
his  unpatriotic  policy  undoubtedly  paved  the  way 
for  the  Norman  invasion  and  the  miseries  resulting 
therefrom.  So  hateful  to  Saxon  England  was  the  sight 
of  a  court  and  a  Church  in  which  the  highest  places 
were  monopolized  by  Normans,  that  Edward's  subjects 
rose  in  revolt  to  expel  Archbishop  Eobert  and  other 
dignitaries  of  foreign  extraction.  Stigand,  Bishop  of 
Winchester,  was  appointed  by  the  Witan  to  the  primacy  ; 
and  the  papal  mandates  ordering  the  reinstatement 
of  Eobert  were  disregarded.  After  the  battle  of 
Hastings  Stigand  anointed  Edgar  Atheling  as  king. 
William  appears  to  have  made  overtures  to  the  last 
Saxon  primate;  but  Stigand  clung  to  that  party  of 
irreconcilables  of  which  Here  ward  was  the  champion. 
Stigand's  appointment  had  from  the  first  been  a  grief  to 
Eome.  In  1070  the  patriot  prelates  were  deposed  by  a 
papal  order. 

Before  we  close  this  chapter,  we  must  remind  the 


THE  NATIONAL  ANGLO-SAXON  CHURCH.     63 
reader  that  the  history  of  the  Anglo-Saxon  Church,  of      chap. 


III. 


which  we  have  given  only  a  compendium,  can  be 
rightly  stutlied  only  in  view  of  the  history  of  Western 
Christianity.     The  period  intervenins;  between  Ausfus-  Ag-ianceat 

.  .  .  .     .  Church 

tine's  mission  and  the  invasion  of  \\  illiam  of  Normandy  history 
happens  to  synchronize  with  one  of  the  great  divisions 
in  the  history  of  Western  Christendom.  The  tendencies 
of  this  historical  period  will  exj)lain  more  especially 
the  relations  of  Saxon  Christianity  and  the  Papacy. 
The  most  noticeable  feature  in  these  five  centuries  is  progress  of 
the  adoption  by  Christianity  of  the  centralizing  ^^^^^^^^^^f^" 
system  of  Eoman  imperialism.  As  far  back  as  the  *®™- 
middle  of  the  fifth  century,  Leo  I.  had  asserted  the 
supremacy  of  the  Roman  bishop  as  the  successor  of  S. 
Peter.  After  the  brilliant  career  of  Gregory  the  Great, 
this  supremacy  became  the  leading  idea  of  the  Popes ; 
and  the  Papacy  at  length  assumed  that  relation  to  the 
converted  which  Eoman  imperialism  had  borne  to  the 
conquered.  Episcopal  prerogatives  were  gradually 
concentrated  in  the  person  of  the  Pope ;  and  the 
system  of  ecclesiastical  polity  was  yet  further  narrowed 
when  the  nomination  to  the  papal  chair  was  declared 
to  be  vested  in  the  body  of  cardinals.  Similarly, 
clerical  prerogatives  everywhere  became  centred  in  the 
bishoprics  and  monasteries;  and  the  parochial  clergy 
gradually  ceased  to  have  any  voice  in  the  management 
of  Church  affairs.  Before  the  end  of  this  period  the 
independence  of  the  Church  was  sapped  by  the  system  '•< 

of    which    the   forged    Decretals    are    the    exponent. 
Pernicious   in   its    consequences,  it  must  be  admitted  its advan- 
that  the  centralizing  system  at  first  sight  appears  to  be  ^^^®^- 
the  system  best  suited  to  the  age.     Civilizing  influences 
were    thus    radiated     simultaneously     throughout    an 
obedient  Christendom ;  and  religious  unity — a  principle 


64  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

which,  the  uneducated  seldom  appreciate  spontane- 
ously— was  authoritatively  maintained.  Justice,  when 
denied  by  local  ignorance  and  prejudice,  was  sought 
at  the  Eoman  court  of  appeal,  and  not  so  vainly  as  in 
the  age  succeeding.  "  During  this  period,"  says  an 
impartial  writer,  "  the  decisions  of  Eome — be  it  said  to 
her  credit — were  mostly  just  and  in  the  interests  of 
morality."  Moreover,  the  Church  was  enabled  to 
contend  successfully  against  slavery  ;  against  the 
debasing  practice — as  yet  disowned  by  Christendom — 
of  expiating  crimes  by  money  payment ;  against  neglect 
of  the  needy  and  oppressed ;  and  against  that  rough  and 
hasty  resentment  of  injury  which  barbarians  mistake 
for  justice.  Vice  in  high  places  received  the  rebuke 
or  the  punishment  which  under  other  systems  it  would 
have  escaped.  Attempts  were  made  to  discountenance 
warfare  ;  and  such  pacts  as  the  "  Truce  of  God"  attest 
the  salutary  influence  of  the  Church  on  a  rough  and 
petulant  generation. 

Unity  throughout  this  period,  as  we  have  already 
closes  on  a  gljown,  kept  out  of  mcn's  minds  the  now  familiar  dis- 

harmo-  ■•- 

nious  state  tinction  between  Church  and  State.  In  the  sphere  of 
politics  the  Anglo-Saxon  bishop  was  an  eorl,  imjiroved 
by  the  influences  of  culture,  learning,  and  religious 
aspirations.  He  sat  as  a  judge  in  the  hundred  court ; 
had  special  jurisdiction  in  suits  concerning  public 
morality  ;  and  was  often  the  king's  chief  minister.  On 
the  other  hand,  the  king,  who  not  unfrequently  ended 
his  life  in  a  monastery,  took  a  leading  part  in  the 
ordering  of  matters  ecclesiastical.  His  rights  in  ap- 
pointing to  vacant  bishoprics  have  been  mentioned. 
He  convened  synods,  wherein  laws  both  civil  and 
ecclesiastical  were  passed,  and  was  even  present  at 
councils  of  a  strictly  ecclesiastical  character.     To  him 


The  period 


THE  NATIONAL  ANGLO-SAXON  CHURCH.     65 

and  his  nobles  belonged  extensive  rights  of  patronage,      chap. 
the  rule  being  that  founders  of  endowed  chnrches  be-     -—J~~> 
queathed   to   their   heirs   the  right  of  appointing  the 
incumbents. 

It  will  be  seen  in  the  next  chapter  how  the  harmony  which  is 
subsisting   between  the  powers  lay  and  ecclesiastical  trans- 
was  rudely  shaken  amid  the  contentions  of  tyrannical  the^ge"^ 
sovereigns   and   pretentious  Popes ; — how  the  secular  ®^^^^^ 
and   spiritual   courts   were   first   separated   and    then 
estranged ; — how  the  term  "  religion  "  was  monopolized 
by  the   monks,   who   affected   as   great   a  disdain   for 
the  secular  clergy  as  for  the  laity ; — how  the  monks 
encroached   on   the   prerogatives  of  the  bishops,  and 
were  encouraged  by  the  Popes  to  do  so; — how  Hil- 
debrand  and  Innocent  III.  taught  the  Anglican  Church 
to  view  Rome  with  jealous  suspicion,  and  thus  paved 
the  way  for  the  anti-papal  statutes  of  the  succeeding 
period,  and  for  the  revolutionary  movements  of  the  four- 
teenth and  fifteenth  centuries. 


66 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


CHAPTER  IV. 

A.D.  1066-1216. 


Contrasted  with  the  period  preceding — Alienation  of  temporal  and  spiritual 
powers— The  Churchmen  fight  for  constitutional  government — Liberties  of  the 
Church  recognized — Guaranteed  again  in  the  succeeding  period— The  Church 
the  stronghold  of  Anglo-Saxon  patriotism — William's  harsh  ecclesiastical  laws 
— The  conflict  also  attributable  to  papal  influence — Hildebrand — Roman  "  media- 
tion " — A  means  of  establishing  temporal  pretensions — The  conflict  often  misin- 
terpreted— Chief  points  at  issue — William's  dealings  with  the  Church — Lanfranc 
— Feudal  tenure  of  bishops — Canons  and  paj^al  sentences  dependent  on  royal 
pleasure — Separation  of  civil  and  ecclesiastical  courts — William's  conquest 
Rome's  conquest — But  William  sometimes  resists  papal  pretension— William 
compared  with  Henry  VIII. — Church  reforms  offensive  to  the  English — Norman 
influence  in  many  respects  salutary — Vain  attempts  to  enforce  clerical  celibacy 
— Anselm  and  William  Rufus — The  confiscation  grievance— Anselm  and  Henry  I. 
— The  investiture  grievance — Rome  always  the  real  gainer — Becket  and  Henry 
II. — How  are  clergy  to  be  tried  ? — Career  of  Becket — Forced  to  head  the  opposi- 
tion— Council  of  Westminster — Constitutions  of  Clarendon — Becket's  party  the 
champions  of  constitutional  government — The  six  years'  contest— Decision  of  the 
question — Treatment  of  heresy — The  Publicani  in  England — Heretics  on  the 
Continent — Monasticism  in  the  ascendant — The  primate  appointed  by  monks — 
The  Pope  appoints  Langton— John  wages  war  with  the  Church — This  ends  in  a 
disgraceful  surrender  to  the  Pope — The  Charter  offensive  to  Rome— The  crown 
offered  to  Louis— Survey  of  general  history— Innocent  III. 

Contrasted  DuRiNG   the  Ano;lo-Saxon  period  tlie  relations  of  the 

witli  the  "^  •*• 

period  pre-  Church  to  the  State  were  seldom  other  than  friendly. 
Religion  and  politics,  ecclesiastical  and  secular  influ- 
ences, were  so  interwrought  in  the  fabric  of  the  consti- 
tution as  to  be  almost  inseparable.  The  Anglo-Norman 
period,  on  the  contrary,  is  characterized  by  conflicts 
almost  continuous  between  the  high  powers  of  Church 
and  State,  notably  between  the  primate  and  the  king. 


ANGLO-NORMAN  PERIOD.  67 

The  Conqueror  deposes  Stigand ;  Eufus  and  Henry  I. 

are  at  issue  with  Anselm,  Henry  II.  with  Becket,  John 

with  Langton.     The  representatives  of  foreign  tyranny 

press  home  the  harsh  ecclesiastical  laws  of  William  I. ; 

the   prelates  of  the  national  Church  clamour  for  the  Alienation 

liberties  guaranteed  to  Churchman  and  commoner  by  an?°^^°^^^ 

the  Ano-lo-Saxon  constitution.     The  people  are  invari-  ^p^^^^^^ 

o  1       i  powers. 

ably  on  the  side  of  the  Church,  the  Norman  barons  on 
that  of  the  throne.     The  regulars,  who  have  swarmed 
into  England  in  the  wake  of  the  foreign  dynasty,  and 
under  the  patronage  of  the  Pope,  are  themselves  en- 
croaching on  the  prerogatives  of  the  Churchmen ;  their 
sympathies  and  interests  are  naturally  on  the  side  of 
foreign  aggression.     Gradually,  as  the  conquered  and  The 
conquering  races  blend,  the  interests  of  the  royal  re-  fight  for  ^^ 
tainers  are  identified  with  those  of  the  English  people  ;  tkmaf^" 
the  barons  become  infected  with  the  national  spirit,  g'ov®^^^- 

i  '  ment. 

they  catch  up  the  Churchmen's  oxy  of  libertj^ ;  there  is 
a  struggle,  in  which  the  sovereign  fights  single-handed, 
or  with  no  ally  but  the  Pope;  the  issue  is  the  en- 
largement of  the  subject's  rights,  and  the  limitation 
of  royal  prerogative  by  the  admission  of  representative 
Houses  to  a  share  in  the  administration. 

The  estate  which  had  borne  the  brunt  of  the  battle  Liberties 
was   rewarded,    at   the    beginning    of    the    thirteenth  church 
century,  by  John's  admission  that  the  "holy  Church ''^''°^'''^^'^- 
of  God  is  a  free  Church,"  not  to  be  "  sold  or  farmed 
out"  at  the  pleasure  of  the   sovereign.      In  the  suc- 
ceeding  period  we    shall   find    repeated    attempts   to 
secure   the   immunities   of  the   Church   against   Pope 
and  sovereign  by  protective  statutes,  preparing  men's 
minds  for  the   acceptance    of  a   body,  self-governing, 
molested  and  despoiled   neither   by   king  nor  pontiff. 
Part  of  this  ideal  was  realized  when  Henry  VIII.,  to 


68 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


Guaran- 
teed again 
in  tlie  suc- 
ceeding' 
period. 


Tlie  Churcli 
tlie  strong- 
hold of 
Anglo- 
Saxon 
patriotism. 


William's 
liarsli 
ecclesiasti- 
cal laws. 


the  gratification  of  nearly  all  the  secular  clergy, 
crowned  the  work  of  the  patriotic  statesmen  of  the 
thirteenth  and  fourteenth  centuries  by  an  absolute  re- 
nunciation of  Roman  supremacy.  But  the  avarice  of 
the  Tudors,  the  personal  pretensions  of  the  Stuarts, 
and  the  jealousies  resulting  from  the  great  constitu- 
tional catastrophes  of  the  seventeenth  century  post- 
poned its  fuller  realization,  and  the  present  relation  of 
the  Church  to  Government  can  hardly  be  considered  a 
final  settlement  of  the  question.^ 

The  conflict  between  the  secular  and  spiritual  powers 
during  the  Anglo-Norman  period  was  to  some  extent 
a  political  necessity.  The  Church  was  the  recognized 
stronghold  of  Anglo-Saxon  patriotism.  Peculiarly  in- 
dependent of  continental  influences  even  in  the  reign  of 
the  degenerate  Edward  the  Confessor,  the  clergy 
resisted  the  usurpation  of  William  long  after  the  less 
patriotic  nobility  had  succumbed ;  when  forced  to 
accept  "the  Norman  dynasty,  they  obstinately  opposed 
the  religious  innovations  of  the  invading  race.  William 
found  it  necessary  to  depose  the  native  prelates,  and  to 
place  the  Church  under  the  control  of  a  foreigner, 
willing  and  able  to  curb  this  spirit  of  independence — 
Lanfranc,  Abbot  of  Bee. 

The  Conqueror's  legislation  betrays  the  aim  of  making 
the  priesthood  an  unpopular  caste,  alienated  from  sym- 
pathy by  severance  from  public  life,  and  deterred  from 
disloyalty  to  the  throne  by  liability  to  oppressive 
Statutes.  This  policy  overreached  itself.  The  restric- 
tions on  the  clergy  and  their  exemption  from  the  privi- 
leges and  liabilities  of  ordinary  citizens  caused  continual 


1  Qiurcbmen  may  reasonably  complain  that  one  estate  of  tlie  realm  has  secured 
self-government  at  the  expense  of  the  other,  ihat  the  Church's  representative  body 
is  a  vox  et  praterea  nihil,  and  that  Christianity  and  common  sense  are  alike 
outraged  when  a  Government  of  any  or  no  religion  is  empowered  to  legislate  for 
(or  against)  the  Church. 


ANGLO-NORMAN  PERIOD.  69 

entanglements  nnder  the  Conqueror's  hot-headed  suc- 
cessors, and  in  every  dispute  between  king  and  Church- 
man the  latter,  regarded  as  the  champion  of  national 
liberties,  commanded  the  sympathies  of  the  lower  orders. 

But  it  is  not  only  to  antijiathy  of  race,  nor  to  The  conflict 
oppressive  legislation,  that  this  conflict  is  to  be  ascribed,  butawe 
With  the  Norman  djmasty  there  entered  England  the  inm^n^e. 
influence  of  a  court,  here  hitherto  inappreciable  as  a 
political  force; — a  court  which,  jealous  alike  of  throne 
and  national  Church,  loved  to  enhance  its  own  import- 
ance by  setting  the  two  at  variance.  We  have  alluded 
to  the  dissemination  of  the  False  Decretals,  and  the 
influence  of  that  publication  in  establishing  the  pre- 
tensions of  the  Papacy.  Contemporary  with  William  micie- 
lived  the  great  Hildebrand,  raised  to  the  pontifical 
chair  as  Gregory  VII.  in  1073.  The  object  of  this 
man's  life  was  to  reform  Europe  by  the  extension  of 
the  powers  accredited  by  the  Decretals.  The  Pope  was 
to  be,  according  to  Hildebrand's  theory,  the  recognized 
umpire  in  all  disputes,  whose  arbitration  should  antici- 
pate the  millennium  and  put  an  end  to  warfare  and  in- 
justice. But  to  be  able  to  act  as  universal  arbiter,  the 
pontiff  must  be  recognized  by  all  prelates,  princes,  and 
kings,  as  their  suzerain  or  liege  lord.  The  triumph  of 
this  well-meaning  but  short-sighted  reformer  over  the 
Emperor  Henry  IV.  convinced  a  generation,  which 
received  the  False  Decretals  unquestioningly,  of  the 
feasibility  of  the  scheme.  Less  conscientious  successors 
reasserted  the  pretensions  of  Gregory  VII.  from  more 
questionable  motives.  Kings  and  prelates  were  en- 
couraged to  make  appeals  to  Rome,  and  accompany 
their  appeals  by  bribes.  Disregard  of  the  papal  verdict 
might  entail  the  fearful  sentence  of  an  excommunica- 
tion or  interdict.     The  interposition  of  a  power  whose 


70 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


CHAP. 

IV. 


Roman 
"  media- 
tion." 


A  means  of 
establisli- 
ing  tempo- 
ral preten- 
sions. 


The  con- 
flict often 
misinter- 
preted. 


interest  it  was  to  set  Chnrch  and  State  at  variance 
widened  the  rupture  which  severed  the  Auglo-Korman 
dynasty  from  the  clergy  of  England.  The  policy  of 
Eome  everywhere  throughout  this  period  was  to 
engender  and  embitter  strifes  between  Churchmen  and 
sovereigns  as  to  questions  of  clerical  prerogative,  so  as 
to  bring  both  parties  as  appellants  to  the  papal  court. 
The  policy  of  William  and  his  immediate  successors 
was,  as  we  have  seen,  one  of  undisguised  hostility 
towards  the  English  Churchmen.  England  therefore 
during  this  period  was  a  fruitful  source  of  revenue  to 
the  court  of  appeal. 

The  response  of  the  oracle  was  seldom  directly 
favourable  to  the  ecclesiastics.  The  successor  of 
S.  Peter  usually  took  care  that  other  episcopates  should 
not  be  unduly  exalted ;  and  Canterbury,  the  patri- 
archate of  the  extreme  West,  appears  to  have  been 
honoured  with  special  jealousy.  An  appeal  from  a 
monastic  house  against  the  English  epi.>eopate  almost 
invariably  resulted  in  a  verdict  for  the  appellant ;  and 
the  regulars  were  thus  encouraged  to  consider  them- 
selves dependent  on  Kome  alone.  On  the  other  hand,  the 
dynasty  which  had  introduced  the  custom  of  appealing 
to  Eome  received  great  boons  from  the  Pope ;  but  for 
every  boon  a  price  was  paid  by  the  establishment  of 
a  precedent  derogating  from  the  honour  of  the  crown. 
The  climax  was  reached  during  the  conflict  of  King 
John  with  the  barons  lay  and  spiritual,  when  the 
payment  due  for  the  sanction  given  to  the  Norman 
Conquest  and  for  other  papal  favours  was  at  last  dis- 
charged by  a  royal  acknowledgment  that  England  was 
a  fief  of  Kome. 

From  party  historians  the  conflict  of  the  Anglo- 
Norman  period  has  received  a  religious  colouring.     The 


ANGLO-NORMAN  PERIOD.  71 

party  whicli  happened  to  fare  ill  at  Rome  is  in-  chap. 
vested  with  the  sentiments  of  Edward  YI.'s  Ee-  .  ^^' 
formers.  Or  the  clergy  are  presumed  to  be  fighting 
on  the  side  of  Romanism  against  rulers  of  anti-papal 
proclivities.  The  student  is  warned  against  such  mis- 
representations of  a  struggle,  which  was,  in  fact,  rather 
political  than  religious.  As  regards  the  Pope,  the  only 
doubtful  question  was,  What  were  the  limits  of  his 
jurisdiction?  His  spiritual  supremacy  was  admitted  by 
all :  kings,  barons,  bishops,  and  monks  were  so  far  of 
one  mind.  The  powers  of  interference  involved  in 
this  supremacy  were  undefinable.  Hence  men  ex- 
aggerated or  curtailed  them  just  as  their  personal 
interests  chanced  to  be  affected.  But  to  aggrandize  a 
foreign  despot  was  as  little  the  settled  policy  of  the 
clergy  as  of  the  sovereign. 

As  regards  the  Church,  the  conflict  bore  on  the  cMe 
political  position  of  the  estate  whose  liberties  had  been  issue, 
most  injured  by  the  Norman  Conquest.  Was  the  king 
to  be  allowed  to  plunder  vacant  sees  ?  Did  the  re- 
ligious character  of  his  office  permit  a  newly  appointed 
bishop  to  do  homage  for  his  temporalities  in  the  same 
way  as  a  lay  baron  ?  The  Churchmen  being  excluded 
from  the  county  courts,  who  was  to  guarantee  that  a 
baron  might  not  murder  a  cleric  with  impunity,  or,  on 
the  other  hand,  that  a  clerical  offender  would  be  tried 
impartially  in  the  ecclesiastical  courts  ?  What,  again, 
were  the  respective  rights  of  the  sovereign  and  the 
suffragan  bishops  in  the  election  of  a  metropolitan  ? 

Such  were  some  of  the  issues  necessarily  raised  by 
William's  limitation  of  clerical  liberties. 

We    now    proceed    to    a    detailed   account    of    this  wiiiiam's 
stormy  period  in  the  history  of  our  Church.     Arch-  tlthtSe 
bishop   Stigand   and   three   bishops  were    deposed  by  c^^^^'^^- 


72 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


CHAP. 
IV. 


AD.  1070. 


lianfranc. 


Feudal 
tenure  of 
bishops. 


Canons  and 
papal  sen- 
tences 
dependent 
on  royal 
pleasure. 


■William  *s 
conquest 
Rome's 
conquest. 


William  as  hopelessly  disaffected  to  the  new  dynasty ; 
and  many  of  the  leading  Anglo-Saxon  ecclesiastics  fled 
the  country  after  the  battle  of  Hastings.  The  interests 
of  the  Norman  ecclesiastics  who  filled  the  episcopates 
thus  vacated  were  so  linked  with  those  of  the  Conqueror, 
that  they  readily  accepted  the  harsh  statutes  devised 
to  suppress  the  native  clergy.  William's  first  pro- 
ceeding after  the  appointment  of  Lanfranc  (1070)  was 
to  reduce  the  episcopate  to  a  state  of  vassalage.  In 
Saxon  times  the  bishops  had  held  their  lands  under  the 
tenure  of  frankalmoign  or  free  alms.  This  was  now 
altered  to  tenure  by  barony,  involving  the  usr»al  feudal 
obligations.  In  view  of  the  possible  disloyalty  of  the 
new  vassals,  the  king  ruled  that  no  Church  Council 
should  pass  canons  disagreeable  to  himself.  Mal- 
contents would  probably  follow  the  royal  example  of 
enlisting  the  good  offices  of  the  Pope;  therefore  no 
letters  from  Kome  should  enter  the  country  till  ap- 
proved of  by  the  king;  nor  should  the  aggrieved 
ecclesiastics  have  liberty  to  quit  England.  It  some- 
times happened  at  this  i)eriod  that  there  was  more 
than  one  claimant  to  the  Papacy;  the  English  eccle- 
siastics were  forbidden  to  recognize  any  Pope  but  the 
king's  Pope.  Hitherto  the  bishop  and  ealdorman  had 
together  dispensed  justice  in  the  county  court.  Hence- 
forward there  were  to  be  two  courts,  the  civil  and 
the  ecclesiastical.  Cases  in  which  clerks  were  con- 
cerned were  to  be  tried  in  the  latter.  But  no  bishop 
was  to  implead  or  excommunicate  any  of  the  king's 
vassals,  even  for  the  grossest  offences,  without  the 
consent  of  the  king.-"^ 

Pope  Alexander  11.  had  hallowed  William's   expe- 
dition with  the  contribution  of  a  consecrated  banner. 

1  Blackstone,  Book  I.  c.  2 ;  Seldeni  notffi  ad  Eadm.,  104. 


ANGLO-NORMAN  PERIOD.  73 

The  conquest  of  England  was  justlj^  regarded  at 
Eome  as  effecting  the  affiliation  of  a  Church  hitherto 
severed  from  papal  influences.  The  Conqueror  perhaps 
considered  that  this  gain  to  the  Papacy  was  sufficient 
requital  for  Alexander's  patronage.  He  was  visited 
by  a  papal  legate,  demanding  homage  to  Gregory  YII. 
as  suzerain  of  all  the  powers  of  Europe,  and  com- 
plainino-  of  the  non-pa\anent  of  Peter's  pence.     Ad-  But  wn- 

...  .  .  liamsome- 

mitting  the  indebtedness  of  the  kingdom  m  the  latter  times 

rGsists 

respect,^  William  let  the  Pope  plainly  understand  that  papal  pre- 
the  claim  to  homage  which  he  had  established  in  other 
countries  would  not  be  recognized  by  the  sovereign  of 
England.     "Homage  to  thee,"  he  replies,  "I  have  not 
chosen,  neither  do  I  choose  to  do.     I  neA^er  made  a 
promise  to  that  effect;  neither  do  I  find  that  it  was 
ever  promised  by  my  predecessors  to  thine."  ^     Arch- 
bishop Lanfrano  imitated  the  policy  of  his  patron.     It 
is  true  that  he  obeyed  a  papal  summons  to  Rome,  when, 
without  compliance,  he  could  not  secure  the  pall.     But 
at  a  later  time  he  completely  disregarded  a  papal  letter, 
desiring  him  to  visit  Rome  "  for  the  confirmation  of  the 
faith  and  of  the  Christian  religion,"  under  pain  of  sus- 
pension.    The  policy  of  William  with  regard  to  Rome  wmiam 
was,  in  short,  that  afterwards  adopted  by  Henry  VIII.  with 
He  was  the  obsequious  servant  of  the  Pope  as  long  as  viil^ 
the  Pope  could  be  of  service ;   his  object  gained,  he 
preferred  to  be  "supreme   head"    himself.     Lanfranc 
abetted  this  policy,  and  sacrificed  the  liberties  of  his 

1  Which,  as  Dean  Hook  observes,  was  more  than  he  need  have  conceded.  For 
the  tax  had  hitherto  not  been  levied  on  the  kingdom,  but  only  on  the  private 
estates  of  the  king,  and  was  paid,  not  as  a  tribute  to  the  Pope,  but  as  a  fund  for  the 
sustentation  of  the  English  college  at  Rome.  Of  these  facts  the  Conqueror  was 
doubtless  ignorant.  It  may  be  noticed  here  that  the  payment  of  Peter's  pence 
continued  from  this  reign  till  that  of  Edward  III.,  when  it  was  prohibited.  It  was 
abrogated  by  statute  23  Hen.  VIII.  c.  21,  to  be  re-established  by  statute  1  &  2 
Philip  and  Mary,  c.  8,  and  finally  abrogated  by  statute  1  Eliz.  c.  I. 

"^  Opp.Lanfr.,  i.,  of,  10. 


I 


74 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


CHAP. 
IV. 


Churcli 
reforms 
offensive 
to  the 
English. 


clerical  brethren  with  Cranmer-like  complaisance.  The 
obligations  of  the  new  dynasty  were,  however,  kept  in 
remembrance  by  S.  Peter's  representatives.  The  debt 
which  the  strong-willed  Conqueror  could  ignore  with 
impunity  was  exacted  with  interest  from  weaker  or 
less  politic  successors. 

The  rule  of  Lanfranc  and  the  Norman  prelates 
was,  of  course,  ungrateful  to  the  native  clergy.  The 
monastic  bodies,  which  had  been  filled  with  foreigners 
by  King  Edward,  were  less  hostile  to  the  new  s^'stem. 
The  Norman  bishops,  however,  in  the  enforcement 
of  reforms,  acted  with  perfect  indifference  to  the 
prejudices  of  the  Church  upon  which  they  had  been 
foisted.  They  deprived  small  Anglo-Saxon  saints  of 
their  posthumous  honours  ;  ^  they  transferred  the  sites 
of  ancient  cathedrals  to  cities  of  greater  importance  ;  ^ 
they  silenced  the  old  Gregorian  chants  in  favour  of  a 
new  system  of  music  devised  by  William  of  Fescamp.^ 
Monasticism  was  developed — too  often  at  the  expense 
of  the  parish  churches;  and  the  "secular  ''  clergy  were 
finally  swept  from  all  the  cathedrals.  These  remained 
monastic  till  the  time  of  the  Reformation.  The  inno- 
vations were  so  far  distasteful  to  the  regulars  that 
they  involved  the  introduction  of  new  orders  of  monks. 
With  the  Conquest  came  the  Canons  Eegular  of  S. 
Augustine  ;  the  Cluniac  and  Carthusian  orders  shortly 

1  This,  of  course,  was  done  to  deprive  Anglo-Saxon  patriotism  of  a  religious 
stimulus.  It  is  curious  to  read  that  the  idolatrous  tendency  of  such  devotion  was 
Lanfranc's  alleged  pretext  in  punishing  Wulfhetul,  the  Abbot  of  Croj'land,  where 
people  floclied  to  see  the  wonder-worlting  shrine  of  Waltbeof.  See  Florence  of 
Worcester;  Matthew  of  Paris  ;  Ordericus  Vitalis,  iv.  c.  17. 

=  The  Council  uf  London  (1075)  ruled  that  the  see  of  Sherborne  should  be  removed 
to  Sarum,  that  of  Sclsey  to  Chichester,  and  that  of  Lichfield  to  Chester.  The  see 
of  Lincoln  took  the  place  of  Dorchester  in  1085 ;  the  see  of  Elmham  was  trans- 
ferred first  to  Thetfurd  (1078),  and  finally  to  Norwich  (1101). 

=>  For  the  account  of  this  innovation  at  Glastonbury  and  the  consequent  insur- 
rection of  the  monks,  see  Florence  of  Worcester,  ad  ann.  1083. 


ANGLO-NORMAN  PERIOD.  75 

followed  ;  the  close  of  the  century  witnessed  the  insti-  chap. 
tiition  of  the  order  of  Citeaux  or  Cistercium,  destined  . — ^1_, 
to  become  the  most  popular  of  all.  Already  the  rival 
houses  in  many  places  impaired  the  prestige  of  old 
foundations.  At  Canterbury  the  ancient  monastery  of 
S.  Augustine's  ^  had  not  only  to  endure  the  presence  of 
a  new  Benedictine  establishment,  substituted  for  the 
secular  cathedral  chapter — the  primate  forced  upon 
them  an  abbot  of  his  own  choosing,  and  severely 
punished  some  brethren  who  ventured  to  resist^  (1089). 

Offensive  as  such  high-handed  proceedings  were  to  Norman 
Anglo-Saxon  patriotism,  it  was  soon  manifest  how  in  many 
greatly  the  Church  had  gained  by  the  infusion  of  the  gaiStarJ. 
Norman  element.  With  the  Normans  came  architec- 
tural science,  which,  if  it  built  castles  for  the  suppres- 
sion of  the  insubordinate,  provided  for  the  devout 
churches  and  cathedrals  surpassing^  the  highest  con- 
ceptions of  Saxon  genius.  Bj^  giving  the  Church  a 
more  elaborate  organization,  Lanfranc  allayed  ancient 
jealousies  and  provided  for  the  establishment  of  orderly 
administration.  The  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  claimed 
to  be  primate,  not  of  England,  but  of  "  the  British 
Isles " — a  claim  he  could  vindicate  by  telling  how 
Patrick,  Archbishop  of  Dublin,  had  tendered  to  him  the 
oath  of  canonical  obedience.  York  was  declared  to  be 
distinctly  subordinate  to  Canterbury,'*  an  arrangement 

1  The  first  in  rank  of  the  English  religious  bouses ;  and  in^Western  Christeudom 
ranliing  as  second  only  to  Monte  Cassino.     See  Robertson,  vol.  v.  395. 

^  See  the  account  in  Hook's  Archbishops,  vol.  i.  pp.  159,  160. 

^  The  new  Cathedral  at  Canterbury  was  begun  by  Lanfranc  shortly  after  the 
Conquest.  Rochester  cathedral  dates  from  1077 ;  Chichester  was  begun  in  the 
same  year.  Durham  belongs  to  the  reign  of  William  II.,  as  also  Norwich  and 
Winchester.  More  than  three  hundred  monasteries  were  built  between  the  years 
1100  and  1200. 

*  The  northern  primate  was  to  go  for  consecration  to  Canterbury,  or  wherever 
the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  should  direct.  Thomas  of  York  had  to  succumb 
before  Lanfranc  ;  but  he  gave  trouble  agam  in  the  time  of  Auselm. 


76 


'  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


CHAP. 
IV. 


Cir.  A.D. 
1090. 


Vain 
attempt 
to  enforce 
clerical 
celibacy,. 


wliicli  tlie  northern  metropolitans  tardily  accepted.^ 
Winchester  was  to  rank  next  to  York,  London  next  to 
Winchester.  HithertO' there  had  been  diversity  of  ritual 
in  the  various  episcopates,  even  in  the  different  abbej's. 
At  Glastonbury,  the  enforcement  of  the  new  Norman 
chants  in  the  place  of  Gregorians  had  resulted  in 
an  insurrection  of  the  monks.  It  was,  perhaps,  this 
episode  which  prompted  the  subsequent  measures  for 
establishing  uniformity.  To  prevent  the  recurrence  of 
such  a  scandal  in  his  diocese,  Osmund,  the  Bishop  of 
Sarum,  composed  a  "  custom  book"  to  be  used  by  all 
his  clergy.  The  production  was  of  singular  merit,  and 
won  Lanfranc's  approval.  Under  the  name  of  the 
"  Use  of  Sarum  "  it  gradually  penetrated  every  diocese. 
The  "Use  of  Sarum"  survives,  expurgated  and  sup- 
plemented, in  our  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  B}'^  the 
Romanists  of  Mary's  time,  this  national  Use  was  ex- 
changed for  the  Eoman  breviary  of  the  continent.^ 

The  national  Churches  of  the  Continent  had  all  been 
affected  by  Gregory's  vigorous  warfare  against  simo- 
niacal  contracts  for  benefices,  and  clerical  marriages, 
considered  the  two  crying  evils  of  the  day.  His  senti- 
ments so  far  influenced  England  that  a  synod  held  at 
Winchester  in  1076  enacted  that  no  married  man 
should  be  ordained,  and  that  no  priest  or  deacon  might 
be  allowed  to  marry .^  It  has  already  been  pointed  out 
that  before  Dunstan's  time  marriage  was  rather  tbe 
rule  than  the  exception  with  the  English  clergy.  After 
Dunstan,  celibacy  was  the  law  even  for  the  parochial 
priests,  but  was  pretty  generally  evaded.    The  censures 

^  See  p.  St,  note. 

"  The  title  of  the  Roman  Service  Book  used  in  England  is,  as  Dean  Hook  points 
out,  "  Ordo  administrandi  Sacramenta,  etc.,  in  niissione  Anglicana  ex  Rituali 
Romano  jussu  Pauli  V.  edito  cxtractus ;  nonnuliis  adjutis  ex  antiquo  Rituali 
Anglicano." — Foxe's  Romish  Rites,  p.  256. 

^   Wilkins,  Concilia,  i.  307, 


ANGLO-NORMAN  PERIOD.  77 

of  this  synod  and  many  succeeding  synods  effected 
little  change  of  practice.  In  Anselm's  time  the  Pope 
admitted  that  clergymen's  sons  formed  "  the  greatest 
and  best  part  of  the  priesthood,"  and  this  was  probably 
equally  true  a  hundred  years  later,  when  Fitzjocelyn, 
a  clergyman's  son,  became  primate.  John  could  find  no 
more  effective  method  of  punishing  the  London  clergy 
than  imprisonment  of  their  focarice.  And  down  to  the 
time  of  the  Eeformation  married  priests  and  sons  of 
priests  often  filled  the  highest  places  in  the  Church. 

Lanfranc  was  succeeded  by  Anselm,  a  more  typical  Anseim 
eleventh-century  ecclesiastic,  who  secured  the  goodwill  nam utifus. 
of  clergy  and  populace  by  resisting  regal  aggression 
jealously   and   persistently,   if  not   always  discreetly. 
For   nearly  four  years  William  Eufus  had  kept  the 
archbishopric  vacant  and  appropriated  its  emoluments, 
and  he  was  dealing  in  the  same  way  with  many  other 
pieces  of  preferment.     At  one  time  this  king  appears 
to  have  pocketed  the  revenues  of  three  bishoprics  and 
thirteen  abbeys.     Frightened  by  illness,  he  pressed  the  -&=i>-  io93- 
primacy  on  Anselm.     The  latter  accepted  it  on  condi- 
tion the  wrongs  of  the  Church  were  redressed.     The  fi^c^ati'Sl 
continuance  of  confiscations  and    exactions  led  to  an  ^^'^^^^^c®- 
open   rupture   between  the  king  and  the  new   arch- 
bishop.    The  Conqueror's  ecclesiastical  laws  were  now 
used  by  Rufus  as  a  means  of  annoying  his  censor.     A 
pall  had  to  be  procured  from  Eome  for  the  metropolitan. 
But   there  were   two   rival   claimants  to  the  Papacy. 
Rufus  for  a  time  pretended  not  to  recognize  Urban  as 
pontiff.     Then  he  tried  by  finessing  with  Urban's  legate 
to  constitute  himself  the  bestower  of  the  pall.     When 
the  pall  was  at  length  obtained,  Anselm  desired  leave 
to  journey  to  Rome  on  business.     The  business  pro- 
bably included  a  very  evil  report  of  his  sovereign's 


78 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


CHAP. 
IV. 


Anselm 
and 
Henry  I. 


proceedings.  "Let  him  know  for  certain,"  replied 
Eufus,  "  that  if  he  goes  I  shall  take  possession  of  the 
archbishopric,  and  never  receive  him  in  the  capacity  of 
archbishop  again."  The  words  were  fulfilled.  Anselm 
went  to  Eome,  and  remained  abroad  for  three  years, 
when  he  received  tidings  of  tflie  tyrant's  death.  His 
successor  entreated  the  primate  to  return,  promising 
that  he  would  not  repeat  the  misdeeds  of  Eufus,  but 
would  govern  the  Church  according  to  the  laws  of 
King  Edward.  Anselm  returned,  but  it  was  only  to 
become  embroiled  with  Henry  on  the  great  "  investi- 
ture" question. 

Under  Canute  England  had  accepted  the  old  conti- 
nental ^  rule  that  the  sovereign  should  invest  ecclesiastics 
with  the  temporalities  of  their  benefices  by  the  transfer 
of  certain  symbols.  Those  used  in  the  case  of  a  bishop 
were  at  this  time  a  staff  and  ring.  On  the  establishment 
of  the  feudal  system,  the  church  everywhere  began 
to  look  upon  this  ancient  ceremony  with  suspicion. 
It  was  thought  that  its  continuance  made  the  Church 
too  dependent  on  the  sovereign.  The  staff  and  ring, 
moreover,  symbolized  to  some  extent  the  spiritual 
powers  of  the  episcopate.  It  was  argued  that,  inas- 
much as  these  were  not  derived  from  earthly  sovereign- 
ties, such  investiture  was  misleading.  The  controversy 
was  one  of  the  kind  that  it  was  Eoman  policy  to 
embitter.  In  the  pontificate  of  Gregory  YIL,  a  synod 
at  Eome  forbade  prelates  to  accept  the  insidious  symbols 
of  investiture,  or  do  any  act  of  homage  for  preferment 
(February,  1075).  Anselm,  who  seems  not  to  have 
heard  of  the  controversy  till  he  went  to  Eome,  professed 
himself  unable  to  do  homage  to  Henry  I.,  and  refused 
to  consecrate  the  bishops  whom  the  king  had  invested. 

1  See  Mosheim,  Inst.  Hist.  Eccl. 


ANGLO-NORMAN  PERIOD.  79 

Henry  in  a  fury  vowed  that  no  one  should  remain  in      chap. 

.  .  .  IV. 

the  kingdom  who  refused  to  do  homage  to  his  suzerain.  — . — • 
Rome  was  appealed  to  by  both  sides,  and  by  Henry 
bribed.  The  papal  trumpet  consequently  gave  an  un- 
certain sound.  The  disjDute  was  eventually  settled  in  a.d.  1101. 
an  English  Council  (1107).  A  compromise  was  then 
effected.  The  Churchmen  consented  to  do  homage  for 
their  temporalities,  and  the  sovereign  gave  up  all  claim 
to  investiture.^  By  the  Concordat  of  Worms,  in  1122, 
a  somewhat  similar  agreement^  was  concluded  between 
Pope  Calixtus  II.  and  the  Emperor  Henry  Y. 

At  this  time  the  national  Churches  were  persuaded  Rome 

,  -^  al-ways  the 

that   every   metropolitan   must   obtain   the   pall   from  real  gainer. 
Eome.     This  was  usually  conveyed  by  a  papal  legate, 
though   sometimes,    as   in   the   case   of  Lanfranc,    the 
metropolitan  had  to  journey  to  Rome  to  fetch  it.     The 
next  step  in  the  policy  of  interference  was  to  obtrude 
uninvited    legates,    who    summoned    and   presided   at 
national   synods    to   the   detriment    of    archiepiscopal 
dignity.     One  such  attempt  Anselm  experienced,  and 
boldly  resisted.     A  weaker  primate,  William  of   Cor- 
beuil,  suffered  a  papal  legate,  John  of  Crema,  to  convene  -^-^  '^'^^^■ 
a  Council  at  Westminster,  wherein  he  took  jorecedence 
of  the   episcopate   and   nobility   (1125).      The   monk 
Gervas  describes  this  as  "  a  sight  hitherto  unknown  in 
the  realm  of  England,"  which  "  put  the  whole  kingdom 
into  no  small  state  of  indignation."  -     Stephen's  doubt- 
ful title  rendered  him  the  servile  dependent  of  Pope 
Innocent  II.*     In  this  reign  Alberic,  Bishop  of  Ostia, 
visited  England  as  papal  legate,  inspected  the  monas- 
teries and  colleges,  convened  a  synod  at  Westminster 
(December,  1138),  and,  disregarding  national  custom, 

1  Spelman,  ii.  26  ;  Wilkins,  i.  387.  ^  See  Robertson,  History,  vol.  v.  p.  20. 

^  Gervas,  Chron.,  1663.  *  See  Ibid.,  1346,  1347. 


8o  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

CHAP,  insisted  that  the  king  had  no  voice  in  the  appointment 
.  ^^'  .  of  the  primate.  True  to  its  principle  of  meting  out 
humiliation  to  sovereigns  and  metropolitans  in  equal 
proportion,  the  Eoman  court  in  the  next  year  appointed 
William  of  Winchester  its  legate,  thus  empowering 
the  suffragan  bishop  to  take  precedence  of  the  Arch- 
bishop of  Canterbury. 
A.D.  1154.  Henry  II.  came  to  the  throne  under  the  pontificate 
of  Nicholas  Breakspear  (Adrian  IV.),  the  only  English- 
man that  has  ever  occupied  the  papal  see.  When  the 
king  proposed  to  invade  Ireland,  he  followed  the  ex- 
ample of  his  great-grandfather,  and  asked  Adrian  to 
sanction  the  expedition.  The  Pope  saddled  his  bene- 
diction with  a  proviso  that  the  conquered  island  should 
pay  Peter's  pence,  "  since  all  the  islands  which  are 
enlightened  by  Christ  are  unquestionably  Peter's 
Becket  and  right."  The  great  episode  of  this  reign,  the  conflict 
Henry  II.  -j^g^^^ggj^  Henry  and  Becket,  is  of  that  kind  which 
elicits  undivided  sympathy  only  in  men  of  strong  party 
feeling.  Each  faction  appears  to  have  had  a  good 
cause  and  grievously  disgraced  it.  It  will  be  re- 
membered that  the  Conqueror  had  tried  to  make  the 
Churchmen  a  caste  alienated  from  popular  sympathy, 
and  unable  to  appear  in  the  civil  courts  of  law.  The 
system  thus  established  was  soon  found  to  be  unsatis- 
factory to  right-thinking  men  of  all  parties.  On  the 
one  hand,  injured  Churchmen  could  not  obtain  adequate 
redress,  since  the  ecclesiastical  court  was  not  able  to 
enforce  its  judgments.  The  murderer  of  a  clergyman 
thus  frequently  escaped  all  penalties  save  excommuni- 
cation, and  the  clergy  were  worse  off,  as  a  contemporary 
writer  puts  it,  than  "  Jews  or  laymen  of  the  lowest 
grade."!     Qn  the  other  hand,  clerical  offenders  some- 

'  Letter  of  Archbishop  Richard,  quoted  by  Dean  Hcok,  Archbishops,  vol.  ii. 


ANGLO-NORMAN  PERIOD.  8i 

times  escaped  easily,  since  the  canon  law  inflicted  on  chap. 
them  no  severer  penalty  than  stripes.  Henr^^'s  judges  v_i3:__ 
represented  that    2:ross  crime  had  frequently  escaped  How  are 

•        +1  1       •       ^-       1  \  T^.       clergy  to 

proper  cognizance   m   the   ecclesiastical   courts.       1  he  be  tried? 
difficulty  would  have  been  speedily  settled  hut  for  the 
touchiness  of  Becket. 

Thomas  Becket,  a  Londoner  of  Norman  parentage,  career  of 
had  been  employed  by  Archbishop  Theobald  in  impor- 
tant diplomatic  service,  and  had  been  rewarded,  after 
the  fashion  of  the  times,  with  sundry  Church  prefer- 
ments, including  the  lucrative  archdeaconry  of  Canter- 
bury. On  the  accession  of  Henry  II.  he  was  recom- 
mended by  Theobald  to  royal  notice,  and  became  the 
king's  chancellor — an  office  in  reality,  though  not  in 
rank,  the  highest  in  the  kingdom.  In  this  capacity 
he  served  the  country  well.  He  is  credited  with  the 
questionable  distinction  of  being  founder  of  our  present 
Court  of  Chancery,  and  he  secured  contemporary  ad- 
miration by  his  zeal  and  personal  courage  in  the 
Toulouse  campaign.  As  ambassador  to  France  Becket 
created  a  sensation  by  his  magnificence,  and  his  tastes 
were  naturally  luxurious.  But  the  attempts  to  repre- 
sent him  as  at  this  time  a  boon  companion  of  the  king, 
intemperate  and  licentious,  have  no  better  origin  than 
party  malevolence.  The  interests  of  the  court  and  the 
Church  were  at  this  lime  considered  almost  essentially 
antagonistic.  The  chancellor  was  on  the  king's  side 
in  every  matter  of  dispute,  and  was  regarded  by  the 

p.  517.  The  Churchmen's  view  of  the  subject  has  been  so  generally  misrepre- 
sented that  it  will  be  instructive  to  cite  some  passages  at  length.  "  If  a  Jew 
or  a  layman  of  the  lowest  grade  be  killed,  the  murderer  is  immediately  sentenced 
to  the  punishment  of  death  ;  wliereas  if  any  one  has  killed  a  priest  or  clergyman 
of  the  lower  or  higher  order,  the  Church,  contented  with  excommunication,  or  I 
should  rather  say  contemned  through  it,  refuses  the  aid  of  the  carnal  weapon.  .  .  . 
Murderers  of  a  clergyman  or  a  bishop  are  sent  to  Rome ;  they  go  in  mere  jest  with 
the  plenitude  of  the  Apostolic  favour,  and  return  to  commit  crime  again  with  greater 
audacity." 

G 


82 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


CHAP. 
IV 


A.D  1162. 


Forced  to 
head  the 
opposition. 


Council  of 
"West- 
minster. 


Constitu- 
tions of 
Clarendon. 
AD.  1164. 


ecclesiastics  as  a  persecutor  of  holy  Church.  This  was 
the  man  whom  Henry  insisted  on  raising,  on  the 
strength  of  his  deacon's  orders,  to  the  highest  post  in 
the  Anglican  Church.  The  king's  wish  was  to  secure 
an  ally  instead  of  an  antagonist  at  Canterbury.  Becket, 
on  the  other  hand,^  warned  the  king  that  his  prefer- 
ment would  make  him  a  true  ecclesiastic,  identified 
with  a  party  markedly  hostile  to  the  court.  The  pre- 
diction fulfi-Ued  itself,  and  primate  and  king  were  in 
their  normal  position  of  ill-concealed  hostility  when 
the  readjustment  of  the  civil  and  ecclesiastical  courts 
became  a  matter  of  public  consideration.  At  a  Council 
at  Westminster  Henry  demanded  that  a  guilty  eccle- 
siastic should  be  degraded  by  the  bishop,  and  subse- 
quently punished  like  a  layman  by  sentence  of  the 
civil  court.  To  this  arrangement  the  prelates  were 
prepared  to  assent.  Becket,  however,  not  unreason- 
ably objected  that  the  clerical  culprit  would  thus  be 
twice  punished  for  the  same  offence ;  then,  assuming  a 
defiant  tone,  he  informed  the  king  that  he  would  not 
obey  any  law  of  the  realm  that  should  compromise 
"  the  privileges  of  his  order."  Henry  left  the  meeting 
in  great  wrath,^  and  summoned  a  council  of  barons  and 
Churchmen  to  the  Castle  of  Clarendon,  where  the  grand 
justiciary  drew  up  the  sixteen  articles  known  as  the 
Constitutions  of  Clarendon. 

The  most  noticeable  enactments  in  these  Constitutions 
were — that  in  all  civil  and  criminal  causes  the  clergy 
should  be  arraigned  in  the  king's  courts;  that  in 
ecclesiastical  questions  appeals  should  lie  from  the 
archbishop  to  the  king ;  that  no  archbishop,  bishop,  or 
"  other   exalted   person "    should    leave   the    kingdom 


>  See  the  Lives— Herbert  of  Bosham,  vii.  27  ;  Roger  of  Tontiguy,  11.  108, 
2  Herbert,  vii.  109,  110;  Roger,  ii.  117, 


ANGLO-NORMAN  PERIOD.  83 

without  royal  permission ;  that  the  revenues  of  vacant  chap. 
proferments  should  accrue  to  the  king ;  that  in  elections  ..J^Il^ 
to  an  archbishopric,  bishopric,  abbacy,  or  priory,  the 
king  should  "  recommend  the  best  persons,"  the  subse- 
quent election  should  be  made  with  the  king's  consent, 
and  the  dignitary  elect  should  do  homage  to  the  king 
for  his  temporalities. 

It  will  be  observed  that  the  Constitutions  are  based  Becket* s 

party  the 

on  William's  ecclesiastical  statutes.     Under  the  pretext  champions 

CO'  -TT  l^         ^  '  -tj    ofconstitu- 

ot  reiormmg  a  recognized  abuse,  the  king  aimed  at  tionai 
resuscitating  that  system  of  personal  tyranny  which  meS"^ 
had  been  recently  invalidated  by  a  disputed  succession 
and  a  civil  war.  On  the  other  hand,  the  policy  of  the 
Church — the  policy  of  which  Becket  was  now  the  cham- 
pion— was  to  limit  the  preponderance  of  the  crown  by 
establishing  a  counterbalance.  The  Church,  enjoying 
the  same  freedom  as  in  Anglo-Saxon  times,  was  to  act 
as  the  people's  bulwark  against  the  encroachment  of 
king  and  barons.  The  general  concessions  afterwards 
defined  by  Archbishop  Langton  in  Magna  Charta  were 
probably  included  in  the  political  programme  of 
Becket's  party.  It  was  desired,  in  fact,  that  not  only 
the  clerical  estate,  but  every  class,  should  be  fairly 
taxed,  tried  by  its  peers,  conceded  its  rights  free  of 
purchase,  and  allowed  to  pass  freely  from  land  to  land, 
save  only  in  times  of  war.  This  was  just  the  class  of 
concessions,  which  the  Constitutions  of  Clarendon  re- 
fused. Hence  Becket,  the  opponent  of  the  Constitu- 
tions, became  at  once  the  idol  of  the  middle  and  lower 
classes,  and  did  in  fact  give  an  impulse  to  the  cause 
of  civil  liberty,  for  which  he  has  scarcely  received 
sufficient  credit.  The  characteristic  infirmities  of  the 
man,  his  bigotry,  petulance,  and  sijiritnal  j)ride,  have 
engrossed   the   attention  of  writers  who  might  have 


84  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

AP.      been  expected  to  do  justice  to  his  public  position  as  a 
s_i3l_.    demagogue,  champion  of  liberty,  and  patron  saint  of  the 
populace. 
The  six  Becket  appears  to  have  been  brought  to  the  Council 

test.  by  treachery,  and  there  bullied  till  he  swore  to  observe 

1170       "    the  "so-called  customs."      But   he  subsequently^    re- 
fused to  set  seal  or  signature  to  these  restrictions  of 
ecclesiastical  prerogative,  and  he  was  absolved  by  the 
Pope  from  his  oath.     Henry  retorted  by  a  preposterous 
claim    on    Becket   for    moneys    received    during    his 
chancellorship.     He   wrung  from  the  Pope,  now  me- 
naced  by  the   pretension    of  an   antipope,    a  legatine 
commission  for  the  Archbishop  of  York,  Becket's  enemy 
and  would-be  rival.     He  even  procured  the  primate's 
condemnation  for  perjury  and  treason  at  the  Council  of 
Northampton,  where  Becket's  enemies,  lay  and  clerical, 
heaped   on   him   shameful^   indignities.      Becket   suc- 
ceeded in  making  his  escape  to  France.     A  six  years' 
contest  ensued.     The  king  plundered  the  revenues  of 
Canterbury.        Becket    from     his    cell    at     Pontigny 
launched  excommunications  on  the  whole  court  faction. 
Policy  still  precluded  the  Pope  from  espousing  Becket's 
cause.     The  bishops  were  many  of  them  on  the  side 
of  the   king — notably  York,  Salisbury,  and   London. 
The   stronghold   of  the  exiled   primate  was  the  pro- 
nounced   sympathy   of    the   English   people.      Incon- 
clusive  meetings   were    held   at    Bayeux,    Caen,    and 
Kouen ;  all  terms  of  truce  were  cancelled  by  Henry's 
reservation,    "  Saving   the    honour   of  my  crown,"    or 
by  Becket's,  "  Saving  the  honour  of  God."     Fresh  en- 
croachment was  made  on  the   primate's  rights.     The 
prince  Henry  was  to  be  crowned  during  his  father's 

»  See  Grim,  Vita,  i.  31 ;  Roger  of  Pont,  i.,  127  ;  Gardiner,  72. 
2  Will.  Cant.  ii.  13. 


ANGLO-NORMAN  PERIOD.  85 

lifetime;  in  defiance  of  Becket's  prerogative  the  chap. 
Archbishop  of  York  performed  the  ceremony.  The  v_f3^ 
enraged  primate  bitterly  rebuked  the  politic  Pope, 
whose  connivance  at  this  usurpation  had  been  secured ; 
and  himself  menaced  England  with  an  interdict. 
Suddenly  and  informally  the  controversy  appeared  to 
end.  A  singularly  peaceful  interview  between  Henry 
and  Becket  took  place  at  Fretville.  The  primate  re- 
turned, to  be  greeted  with  acclamations  by  the  popu- 
lace, but  with  insults  and  threats  of  violence  from  the 
knights  and  barons  who  had  divided  the  archiepiscopal 
emoluments,  and  the  bishops  whom  he  had  excommuni- 
cated.^ He  vainly  sought  redress  from  the  young  king 
at  Woodstock.  Inspirited,  however,  by  his  popularity 
with  the  lower  orders,  he  proceeded  to  launch  excom- 
munications, not  only  on  the  chief  offenders,  the  sacri- 
legious knights  and  the  contumacious  suffragans,  but  on 
all  such  clergy  as  had  been  presented  to  preferment  in 
his  diocese  during  his  exile.  The  leaders  of  the  hostile 
party  sought  the  king  at  Bayeux  and  claimed  his  pro- 
tection. Henry's  hasty  speech,  taken  too  literally  by 
four  brutal  and  obsequious  knights,  the  murder  in  Can- 
terbury Cathedral  (December  29,  1170),  and  the  subse- 
quent penitence  of  the  excommunicate  king,  are  familiar 
to  every  reader.  It  remains  to  notice  that  the  violent 
death  of  Becket  practically  gave  the  victory  to  the 
supporters  of  clerical  prerogative.  To  clear  himself  of 
complicity  in  the  murder,  Henry,  in  the  presence  of  the 
papal  legates,  resigned  all  customs  and  usages  practised 
in  his  time  to  the  prejudice  of  the  Church ;  and  in  Decision 
1177  he  definitely  promised  the  legate  Vivian  that  no  question, 
clerk  should  be  prosecuted  in  a  secular  court  for  any 
crime,  and  that  no  ecclesiastical  revenues  should   be 

1  Grim,  i.  67  ;  Gamier,  121, 


86 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


Treatment 
of  heresy. 


The  Pub- 
lican! in 
England. 

AD.  1160. 


detained  in  the  king's  hands  more  than  a  year.  On 
the  other  hand,  Archbishop  Eichard,  Beeket's  successor, 
with  the  view  of  restoring  harmony,  conceded  to  the 
king  the  privilege  of  impeaching  offending  clerks, 
and  thus  removed  the  only  pretext  for  oppressive 
legislature.  For  the  rest  of  his  reign  Henry  appears 
to  have  acted  towards  the  Church  with  justice  and 
wisdom. 

In  the  age  of  which  we  are  treating  it  was  held  that 
the  spiritual  welfare  of  the  community  deserved  pro- 
tection, just  as  much  as  its  temporal  or  political  welfare. 
The  heretic  who  propagated  his  heresy  was  classed  with 
the  murderer  and  traitor,  as  an  enemy  to  the  State; 
or,  rather,  his  guilt  exceeded  theirs  in  proportion  as 
the  soul  outvalues  the  body.  This  opinion  was  main- 
tained and  acted  upon  by  both  the  contending  parties 
in  the  Eeformation  period ;  and  it  was  not  decidedly 
discredited  till  the  eighteenth  century.  In  an  age  in 
which  there  was  no  thought  of  making  punishments 
other  than  brutal,  the  heretic  was  treated  with  a 
severity  which  excites  the  compassion  of  a  more  en- 
lightened generation.  The  reign  of  Henry  11.  presents 
us  with  an  instance  of  this  forcible  suppression  of 
religious  error.  A  company  of  German  heretics,  called 
Publicani,  entered  England  in  1160,  under  the  leader- 
ship of  Walter  Gerhard.  They  denounced  the  use  of 
all  sacraments,  and  endeavoured  to  propagate  an  absurd 
asceticism,  prohibiting  marriage  and  the  use  of  animal 
food  and  wine.  Having  turned  a  deaf  ear  to  persuasion, 
they  were  at  last  sentenced  to  be  publicly  whipped, 
and  as  it  was  ordered  that  no  man  should  give  them 
entertainment,  they  were  fairly  starved  out  of  the 
country.  This  is  said  to  be  the  first  occasion  when 
punishment   for   heretical   teaching   was    lequiied    in 


ANGLO-NORMAN  PERIOD.  87 

England,  and  only  one  instance  of  the  capital  punish-      chap. 
ment  of  heretical  or  immoral  preaching  occurs  before     - — . — 
the  reign  of  Henry  IV. 

Other  nations  were  not  so  fortunate  in  this  respect.  Heretics 
Almost  every  continental  state  was  disturbed  during  continent, 
the  twelfth  century  by  the  preaching  of  sectaries,  who, 
under  the  pretext  of  remedying  abuses  of  religion, 
propounded  new  systems  in  which  grotesqueness  vied 
with  immorality.  In  this  connection  the  names  of 
Peter  de  Bruys,  Henry,  the  founder  of  the  Henricians, 
Arnold  of  Brescia,  and  Tanquelm,  a  kind  of  twelfth- 
century  Mormonite,  may  be  mentioned.  Usually  the 
founder  of  the  sect  contrasted  favourably  with  his 
followers.  The  heresiarch,  sincerely  convinced  of  his 
crotchet,  inveighed  against  matrimony  or  preached 
polygamy,  rejected  all  dogma  or  devised  new  dogma, 
clamoured  to  enrich  himself  with  ecclesiastical  property, 
or  went  naked.  The  followers  were  for  the  most  part 
a  worthless  rabble,  who  made  the  shibboleth  of  their 
leader  a  pretext  for  the  gratification  of  their  own  lust 
and  avarice.  The  most  notorious  among  the  sects  of 
this  time  were  the  heretical  Albigenses  of  Toulouse, 
said  to  be  a  branch  of  the  Bulgarian  Cathari,  and  the 
Waldenses,  or  poor  men  of  Lyons.^     Both  these  were 

'  The  Albigenses  appear  to  have  denied  the  doctrine  of  the  resurrection,  dis- 
carded all  sacraments,  and  accepted  in  part  the  ^Manicbcean  teaching-  of  the 
Cathari,  asserting  the  existence  of  two  First  Causes — one  good,  one  evil.  Like  some 
later  sects,  they  used  a  conscientious  scruple  against  taking  oaths  as  a  covert  for 
prevarication.  Innocent  III.  ordered  a  kind  of  crusade  against  the  Albigenses 
and  the  nobles  of  France  suppressed  the  sectaries  with  terrible  severity.  A  few  of 
this  persuasion  are  said  to  have  existed  in  the  sixteenth  century  and  embraced  the 
doctrines  of  Zuingle.  With  this  sect  are  often  confounded  the  harmless  Waldenses, 
or  poor  men  of  Lyons,  who  probably  derived  their  origin  and  name  from  Peter  of 
Valdum,  a  town  in  the  marquisate  of  Lyons.  These  were  a  sect  of  pietists, 
whose  aim  it  was  to  prohibit  warfare,  lawsuits,  and  all  accumulation  of  wealth. 
The  doctrinal  chimeras  of  the  Waldenses  are  interesting  as  anticipating  those  of 
later  sects,  and  a  modern  admirer  has  not  unfairly  designated  them  as  "  premature 
Protestants."     Unable  to  discern  living  energy  in  the  religious  institutions  of 


88 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


Monasti- 
cism  in  the 
ascendant. 


A.D.  1176. 


subjected  to  persecutions  of  fearful  cruelty,  and  the 
Albigensian  heresy  first  suggested  to  Innocent  III.  the 
idea  of  an  inquisitorial  commission  to  take  cogni- 
zance of  irreligious  teaching.  This  gave  place,  under 
Gregory  IX.,  to  the  standing  tribunal  of  Dominicans, 
called  the  Inquisition. 

The  reigns  of  Henry  II.  and  his  sons  illustrate  the 
growing  pretensions  of  the  monastic  houses  and  the 
connivance  given  to  these  pretensions  by  the  papal 
court.  The  abbots  of  Malmesbury  and  S.  Augustine's, 
Canterbury,  were  encouraged  to  refuse  the  oath  of 
canonical  obedience  to  their  respective  diocesans,  and 
Richard,  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  was  impelled  to 
write  an  indignant  remonstrance  on  this  subject  to 
Alexander  III.  This  kind  of  insubordination  was 
shown  in  many  other  monastic  centres.  The  abbots 
of  Battle  were  in  conflict  with  the  bishops  of  Chi- 
chester, the  abbots  of  Malmesbury  with  the  bishops 
of  Sarum,  the  abbots  of  St.  Albans  with  the  bishops 
of  Lincoln.  Canterbury,  however,  was  the  focus  of 
all  monastic  pretension.  "  It  seems,"  writes  John  of 
Salisbury,  "as  if  hatred  of  their  archbishops  were 
an  inheritance  of  the  monks  of  Canterbury."  Here, 
in  consequence  of  Lanfranc's  transformation  of  the 
cathedral  chapters,  the  diocesan  was  also  Abbot  of 
Christ  Church.  The  monks  of  Christ  Church  there- 
fore  claimed  a  voice  in  the  election   of  the   English 


their  day,  the  Waldenses  conjured  up  an  imaginary  Apostolic  age  to  disprove  the 
antiquity  of  such  institutions.  The  ideal  Apostolic  age  was  to  be  created  out  of 
such  scanty  details  or  indications  as  could  be  found  in  the  New  Testament,  to  the 
exclusion  of  other  sources  of  information.  Such  a  system  has  only  to  be  supple- 
mented by  the  idea  that  the  New  Testament  can  be  interpreted  aright  by  every 
unlettered  pietist,  to  damage  the  pedigree  and  reputation  of  every  doctrine  and 
practice  of  the  Christian  religion.  The  ecclesiastical  policy  of  such  bodies  is,  in 
fact,  a  system  of  negation  or  "protest" — negation  which,  as  history  teaches  us, 
gradually  extends,  and  ends  at  last  in  absolute  infidelity. 


ANGLO-NORMAN  PERIOD,  89 

primate.  Not  satisfied  witli  this  claim,  they  endea- 
voured to  overthrow  the  concnrrent  right  vested  in 
the  bishops.  Baldwin,  Eichard's  successor,  was  elected 
by  the  bishops,  but  had  to  accept  a  distinct  nomination 
from  the  monks  of  Christ  Church.  This  archbishop 
tried  to  break  the  disagreeable  connection  by  erecting  a.d.  iiss. 
a  new  canonical  establishment  at  Hackington.  He 
apparently  proposed  to  transfer  the  electoral  rights 
to  this  foundation,  by  presiding  as  abbot  there  instead 
of  at  Christ  Church.  The  monks,  however,  obtained 
a  letter  from  Pope  Urban  forbidding  the  undertaking.^ 
The  archbishop  and  other  prelates  protested  against 
this  interference  of  Eome.  The  monks,  however,  re- 
tained their  rights,  and  a  subsequent  attempt  to 
transfer  the  primate's  abbotship  to  a  new  house  at 
Lambeth  was  stopped  in  the  same  way. 

Disputes  of  this  kind  were  of  frequent  occurrence.  The 
The  audacity  of  the  regulars  may  seem  to  have  reached  appointed 
its  climax  in  1205,  when  a  party  at  Christ  Church  ^u  5^205' 
secretly  appointed  Reginald,  their  sub-prior,  to  the 
metropolitan  see,  and  sent  him  to  Eome  to  have  his 
title  confirmed  before  the  king  or  prelates  should  get 
wind  of  the  matter.  The  sub- prior  not  having  scru- 
pulously observed  the  oath  of  secrecy,  the  monks 
cancelled  this  appointment,  and  consented  to  elect  the 
king's  nominee,  John  de  Grey,  Bishop  of  Norwich. 
But  the  sufiragan  bishops  had  not  been  consulted ; 
they  appealed  to  the  Pope  against  this  second  appoint- 
ment. The  dispute  ended,  as  usual,  in  the  establish- 
ment of  a  precedent  advantageous  to  Eoman  assumjition. 
The  Pope  first  recommended,  and  then,  by  threats  of 
excommunication,  forced,^  the  monks  to  accept  a  third 

>  Gervas,  Chron.  1491,  1495,  1496,  1530. 

*  The  monks  s;ood  out  boldly  for  de  Grey  in  the  papal  presence.    Matthew  of 


90  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

candidate,  his  own  favourite  cardinal,  Stephen  Langton. 
The  new  primate  was  already  distinguished  as  a  divine  ^ 
The  Pope     and  a  man  of  letters.     He  was  destined  to  immortalize 

appoints  .  ,  ,  .  i  •   i 

liangton.     himself  as  the  champion  of  the  liberties  of  the  English 

A  D  1207. 

Church  and  people,  the  statesman  who  led  the  barons 
to  identify  their  interests  with  those  of  the  people,  and 
the  author  of  Magna  Charta.  It  need  not  be  said  that 
Innocent  III.  did  not  foresee  such  a  career  when  he 
appointed  Langton  to  the  primacy. 
John  wages  John  was  justly  indignant  at  the  papal  encroach- 
thTchurch.  uieut ;  he  unjustly  punished  the  Church  for  the  offence 
of  the  unassailable  Pontiff.  Not  content  with  expell- 
ing the  monks  of  Christ  Church  from  the  kingdom,  he 
vented  his  hatred  of  Langton  in  blind  violence  towards 
the  whole  body  of  Churchmen,  who,  with  judicious 
management,  might  have  been  induced  to  side  with 
him  against  the  Pope.  He  wrote  an  insolent  letter  to 
Innocent,  who  replied  by  putting  England  under  an 
A.D.1S08.  interdict.  The  sufferings  of  the  countiy  under  this 
sentence  have  been  exaggerated.  Langton  contrived 
to  mitigate  its  severity,  and  the  bishops  of  Winchester, 
Durham,  Warwick,  and  other  leading  Churchmen  abso- 
lutely ignored  it.  John  profited  by  it,  as  he  expelled 
many  of  the  clergy  who  enforced  it  and  pocketed  their 
revenues.  Innocent  next  pronounced  the  excommuni- 
cation of  John,  and  (upon  his  refusing  to  come  to  terms 
with  Pandulph,  the  papal  nuncio)  his  deposition  from 
the  throne.     Philip  of  France  was  charged  to  invade 

Paris  states  that  they  had  been  previously  bound  by  oath  to  the  king  not  to  accept 
any  other  nominee.  Finding  themselves  between  two  fires,  they  preferred  the 
wrath  of  the  temporal  to  that  of  the  ecclesiastical  tyrant. 

^  He  had  been,  it  seems,  president  or  chancellor  of  the  schools  of  Paris.  He 
held  a  prebend  at  Notre  Dame  as  well  as  at  York  Minster.  Dean  Hook  describes 
him  as  "profoundly  erudite,"  and  "distinguished  as  a  poet,  a  schoolman,  and  a 
Biblical  scholar."  He  had  been  made  cardinal  in  1206,  and  King  John  had  written 
him  a  letter  of  congratulation  on  this  occasion. 


ANGLO-NORMAN  PERIOD.  91 

England,  and  the  barons,  victimized  by  John's  rapacity      chap. 
and  lust,  viewed  the  invasion  with  indifference.     John,     ^^_J — ■ 
now  as  abject  as  he  had   been   arrogant,   tendered   a 
servile  submission  to  Innocent.    By  a  pact,  the  disgrace  ad.  1213. 
of  which  attaches  to  the  barons  no  less  than  to  the 
king,  England  and  Ireland  ^  were  acknowledged  to  be 
fiefs  of  Eome,  and  the  king  was  pledged  to  pa}''  the 
papal   suzerain   one   thousand    marks   yearly.^      John 
having  also  promised  to  cease  his  persecution  of  the 
clergy,  Langton   ignored   the   papal   sentences  which 
were  still  in  force,  and,  on  his  own  responsibility,  gave 
him  absolution   in  Winchester  Cathedral.     This   pro- 
ceeding gave  great  offence  at  Eome ;  ^  it  was  shortly 
followed  by  another  yet  more  offensive.     Stimulated  by 
the  bold  example  of  the  Churchmen,  and  acting  under 
the  advice  of  Stephen  Langton,  the  barons  demanded  a.d.  isis. 
a  formal  security  for  the  liberties  of  all  classes,  and  the 
king  was  forced  to  make  the  concessions  embodied  in 
the  Great  Charter.      But  documents  which  protected  tj^q 
the  subject  against  his  lord  were  as  injurious  to  the  offensive 
Papacy  as  to  the  throne  now  that  the  Pope  was  suzerain  ^°  Rome, 
of  England ;  and  those  clauses  which  claimed  for  the 
Church  of  England  her  ancient  rights  and  liberties,  and 
protected  her  bishoprics  from  simoniacal  appointments,^ 
were  particularly  displeasing  to  such  a  Pope  as  Innocent 

1  Scotland,  in  the  time  of  Edward  I.,  followed  the  example  of  the  sister  kingdom. 
To  defeat  Edward's  pretensions  the  patriots  acknowledged  the  Pope  as  their 
suzerain,  and  confessed  that  Scotland  had  always  been  a  fief  of  Rome. 

'  This  paj^ment  was  not  abolished  till  1366,  when  Edward  III.  ordered  an  in- 
vestigation of  John's  conduct,  and  prelates,  peers,  and  commons  unanimously 
pronounced  it  illegal,  and  pledged  themselves  to  support  the  king  in  resisting  such 
papal  encroachments. 

'  Innocent,  Ep.  xvi.  164 ;  cf.  Ep.  xvi.  89. 

*  "  I  ...  in  the  first  place  constitute  the  holy  Church  of  God  a  free  Church,  so 
th£.t  I  will  not  sell  it  nor  farm  it  out,  nor  will  I,  on  the  death  oi  any  archbishop, 
bishop,  or  abbot,  take  anything  from  the  domain  of  the  Church  or  its  people  until 
his  successor  takes  his  place." — Charter  of  Henry  I.,  accepted  by  John  in  1213,  and 
confirmed  by  Magna  Charta. 


92 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA, 


CHAP. 

IV. 


The  cro^vn 
offered  to 
Xioujs. 


A.X).  1217. 


Survey  of 

general 

history. 

Innocent 

III. 

1198-1216. 


III.  Eome  was  henceforth  on  the  king's  side.  Inno- 
cent annulled  the  Charter,  excomnmnicated  the  barons, 
and  pronounced  the  suspension  of  Archbishop  Langton. 
These  sentences  were  so  far  regarded  that  Langton 
journeyed  to  Eome  to  make  remonstrance.  Meanwhile, 
the  barons,  despairing  of  obtaining  redress  from  such 
a  king  as  Innocent's  "  well-beloved  son  in  Christ,  John 
the  Illustrious,"  offered  the  crown  to  Louis,  the  eldest 
son  of  Philip  of  France,  and  in  defiance  of  papal 
threats,  that  prince  landed  on  the  I^5le  of  Thanet.  The 
opportune  deaths  of  John  and  Innocent  extricated 
public  affairs  from  a  state  of  hopeless  confusion. 
Langton  returned  unforgiven  to  confirm  the  Charter 
in  the  name  of  the  boy-king  Henry ;  Louis  retired 
defeated  by  land  and  sea ;  the  papal  sentences  were 
unheeded,  and  Langton  actually  wrested  from  Eome 
a  promise  that  as  long  as  he  lived  no  legate  should  be 
sent  into  England. 

This  period  begins  with  the  great  Hildebrand — it 
closes  with  the  death  of  a  pontiff  of  more  extravagant 
pretensions  and  less  respectable  motives.  Under  Inno- 
cent III.  the  Papacy  attained  its  acme  of  aggrandize- 
ment. The  princes  of  Europe  marched  by  his  orders 
against  the  wretched  heretics  of  Southern  France; 
the  powerful  Philip  Augustus  of  France  and  the 
weak  John  of  England  alike  succumbed  before  him. 
The  mendicant  orders  and  the  Inquisition — two  in- 
fluences of  paramount  importance  in  the  Church 
history  of  after  years — originate  in  this  pontificate. 
The  Greek  Church  acknowledged  Innocent's  su- 
premacy, and  its  prelates  attended  at  the  fourth 
Lateran  Council  (1215),  where  seventy  canons  were 
passed  by  the  Pope  on  his  own  authority.  The  most 
noticeable  of  these  canons  are  those  which  assert  the 


ANGLO-NORMAN  PERIOD.  93 

dogma  of  transubstantiation,  and  declare  that  princes     chap. 
are  obliged  to  clear  their  dominions  of  heresy  under     .   ^^- 
pain  of  excommunication  and  deposition.     In  the  very- 
grandeur    of    such   Popes    as    Innocent   III.   lay   the 
greatest  danger  to  the  papal  power.     The  pretensions 
bequeathed  by  Innocent  harmonized  ill  with  the  weak 
or  contemptible  characters  of   his  successors,   and  the 
contrast  suggested   revolt.     Kor  did  it  escape   notice 
that   when   papal   assumption   was   backed  up,  as   in 
Innocent's  case,  by  real  strength  of  character,  the  Hilde- 
brandine  ideal  of  a  universal  arbiter  was  so  far  from 
being  realized  that  the  Pope's  influence  was  usually 
on  the  side  of  tyranny  and  oppression.     "  Woe  unto 
him  that  justifieth  the  wicked  for  a  reward,"  said  the 
barons  as  they  read  the  papal  letter  which  denounced 
the  Charter.     Already  the  legitimacy  of   the  misused 
prerogatives  was   matter  of   question,  and  men  were 
heard  to  argue  that  "the  ordering  of  secular  matters 
appertaineth   not   to   the  Pope."  v  Circumstances   soon 
changed  such  chance  expressions  of  discontent  to  an 
open  policy  of  resistance,  speaking  through  statutes  of 
unequivocal  import. 


94 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


CHAPTEE  Y. 

A.D.  1200-1300. 

struggle  for  "constitutional  government — Guided  by  great  Churchmen — Convoca- 
tion established — Convocation  not  distinct  from  Parliament  for  a  time — Its 
constitution — The  Church  harassed  by  Pope  and  king — Grosseteste  the  Church's 
protector — Edward  resists  the  Pope,  but  persecutes  the  clergy — "  Statute  of 
Mortmain  " —The  universities  supplant  the  monasteries — The  statute  "Circum- 
specte  Agatis" — Edward's  collision  with  Wiiichelsey — Decline  of  the  Papacy — 
Boniface  VIII. — Papal  encroachments  resisted —Moral  influence  of  Church 
waning— Statesmen  bishops— Clergy  and  monks — Errors  in  doctrine  and 
practice — Revival  of  religion  by  the  preaching  friars— Their  success  in  England 
— They  become  demoralized — The  friars  at  the  universities — The  friars  and 
papal  malpractices— Indulgences. 

The  reign  of  Henry  III.  is  marked  by  a  continued 
struggle  of  the  baronage,  now  thoroughly  identified 
with  the  insular  population,  against  arbitrary  govern- 
ment on  the  part  of  the  king.  From  this  struggle 
there  emerges  a  constitutional  government  in  which 
the  factors  are  the  three  estates  of  clergy,  lords,  and 
commons.  The  pretensions  of  the  throne  were  still 
supported  by  Eome,  for  the  most  conspicuous  feature 
in  the  policy  of  Henry  III.  was  his  devotion  to  the 
Papacy.  The  clergj^  continue  to  head  the  party  of 
resistance.  They  protect  themselves  against  king  and 
Pope  by  conciliar  action,  involving  the  adoption  of  a 
representative  system.  Thus  is  established  a  precedent 
for  Parliaments  including  burghers  as  well  as  knights  of 
shires.  The  thirteenth  century,  according  to  Professor 
Stubbs,  is  "  the  golden  age  of  English  Churchmanship. 


THE  12>TH   CENTURY.  95 

The  age  tliat  produced  one  Simon  among  the  earls 
produced  among  the  bishops  Stephen  Langton,  S. 
Edmund,  Grosseteste,  and  the  Cantilupes.  The  Charter 
of  Eunnymede  was  drawn  in  Langton's  age ;  Grosseteste 
was  the  friend  and  adviser  of  the  constitutional  oppo- 
sition ;  Berksted,  the  episcopal  member  of  the  electoral 
triumvirate,  was  the  pupil  of  S.  Eichard  of  Chichester; 
S.  Edmund  of  Canterbury  was  the  adviser  who  com- 
pelled the  first  banishment  of  the  aliens ;  S.  Thomas 
of  Cantilupe,  the  last  canonized  Englishman,  was  the 
chancellor  of  the  baronial  regency."  The  great  states- 
men, patriots,  judges,  and  lawyers  were  in  fact,  now  Gmdedby 
and  for  years  afterwards,  clerks  in  Holy  Orders.^  And  churcii- 
if  we  except  the  foreigners  foisted  into  benefices  by  the  ^^^' 
king  or  the  Pope,  the  leading  Churchmen  gave  unani- 
mous adhesion  to  the  party  which  elamoured  for 
constitutional  government.  During  this  struggle,  how- 
ever, the  difi'erence  between  the  lay  and  the  clerical 
status  was  emphasized,  the  clergy  being  now  subjected 
to  new  exactions,  which  did  not  press  upon  the  laity, 
by  the  substitution  of  taxation  of  spiritual  revenues 
for  that  of  land.  When  King  John  proposed  in  1207 
to  inflict  a  charge  of  this  nature,  it  was  resisted  as 
without  precedent.  The  attempt  was  repeated  shortly 
afterwards  by  the  Pope.  Gradually  this  sj'^stem  of 
taxation  became  established,  and  the  clergy  were 
henceforth  convened  in  distinct  assemblies  for  purposes 
of  taxation.  It  was  thus  that  "  the  clerical  estate 
worked  out  an  organization  as  an  estate  of  the  realm, 
asserting  and  possessing  deliberative,  legislative,  and 

1  Dean  Hook  enumerates  the  following  offices  as  filled  by  clergymen  in  the 
reign  of  Edward  III. :  Lord  High  Chancellor,  Keeper  of  the  Privy  Seal,  Master  of 
the  Rolls,  Master  of  Chancery,  Chief  Chamberlain  of  the  Exchequer,  Chancellor 
of  the  Exchequer,  Clerk  of  the  Privy  Seal,  Treasurer  of  the  King's  House,  Master 
of  the  King's  Wardrobe,  etc. 


96 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


Convoca- 
tion not 
distinct 
from  Par- 
liament for 
a  time. 


Its  consti- 
tution. 


A. T).  1283. 


taxing  powers."  This,  in  fact,  is  the  origin  of  Con- 
vocation, the  Church's  tax-paying  agency  until  the 
year  1664,  and  her  administrative  agency — in  theory 
at  least — until  1717,  and  tolerated  since  the  year  1854 
as  a  debating  society. 

The  history  of  Convocation  is,  however,  at  this  time 
so  mixed  up  with  that  of  Parliament  that  it  is  hard 
sometimes  to  distinguish  the  lay  from  the  clerical 
convention.  Sometimes  a  Parliament  included  not  only 
the  bishops  and  priors,  but  archdeacons  and  deacons. 
In  the  Parliaments  summoned  by  Henry  in  1265  and 
1282  were  proctors  for  cathedral  chapters.  In  1295 
Edward  held  a  mixed  assembly,  in  which  the  Church- 
men were  represented  by  the  same  procuratorial  arrange- 
ment as  had  been  established  for  the  province  of 
Canterbury.  During  this  latter  reign,  however,  the 
clerical  element  plainly  severs  itself  from  the  lay ;  the 
summons  to  Parliament  ^  is  sent  only  to  the  bishops  and 
a  limited^  number  of  abbots  and  priors,  and  it  is  in 
Convocation  that  the  clergy  tax  themselves.  The 
abbots  and  priois  retained  their  seats  up  to  the  time 
of  the  dissolution  of  the  monasteries  (1538).  The 
arrangement  by  which  the  clergy  are  still  represented 
in  the  Canterbury  Convocation  dates  from  1283,  when 
Peckham  was  primate.  With  the  bishops,  abbots,  priors, 
deans,  and  archdeacons,  there  are  two  proctors  for  the 
clergy  of  each  diocese,  and  one  for  each  cathedral 
chapter.  The  arrangement  for  the  Convocation  of 
York  is  one  in  which  the  parochial  clergy  are  more 

1  From  the  year  1314  to  the  year  1340  the  clerical  proctors  were  summoned  to 
Parliament.  After  1340  their  attendance  in  Parliament  was  rarely  insisted 
on.  After  the  beginning  of  the  fifteenth  century  they  appear  to  have  ceased 
attendance. 

"■  About  thirty  or  forty,  according  to  Palgrave.  This  number,  with  the  episco- 
pate, was  sufficient  to  give  the  lords  spiritual  a  majority  in  the  Upper  House, 
where  all  measures  were  at  this  time  initiated. 


THE   12>TH   CENTURY.  97 

fairly  represented,  two  proctors  being  sent  for  eacli 
archdeaconry.  This  rule  dates  at  least  as  far  back  as 
1279.  That  two  provincial  synods  were  established 
rather  than  one  national  Convocation  is  explained  by 
the  jealous  assertions  of  independence  to  which  the 
northern  metropolitans  were  addicted.  The  union  of 
the  two  sj^nods,  one  of  the  many  wise  reforms  con- 
templated by  Wolsey,  will  doubtless  be  effected  when 
the  Church  recovers  full  liberty  of  action. 

It  was  not  till  1307  that  any  anti-Eoman  legislation  Tiie  church 
was  initiated  by  the  Crown,  and  it  would  be  hard  to  by^pope 
say  whether  the  clergy  in  the  thirteenth  century  ^^^  ^^^" 
suffered  more  from  the  Pope  or  from  the  king.  The 
bold  patriotism  of  Langton  protected  his  brethren  from 
exactions  during  his  own  lifetime.  His  demise  (1228) 
was  at  once  followed  by  a  papal  demand  for  a  tenth  of 
movables  to  prosecute  the  war  against  the  emperor. 
The  clergy  vainly  endeavoured  to  resist  this  demand. 
The  king  and  the  papal  legate  pulled  together:  the 
former  lavished  his  patronage  on  Bretons  and  Pro- 
vengals,  the  latter  gave  the  English  benefices  to  Italians. 
These  foreigners,  in  most  cases,  resided  w^holly  abroad. 
Already  a  claim  had  been  made  by  Gregory  IX.  to 
two  prebends  in  every  cathedral  and  the  allowance 
of  two  monks  in  each  monastery.  The  patrons  of 
livings  were  particularly  aggrieved  by  the  practices 
known  as  "  provision  "  and  "  reservation."  By  "  pro- 
vision "  a  living  not  yet  vacant  was  provided  with  its 
future  incumbent  by  the  Pope.  "  Reservation  "  gave  un- 
limited facility  for  such  provision,  it  being  a  claim  on 
the  part  of  the  Pope  to  reserve  to  himself  any  benefice 
he  desired.  It  was  an  evil  time  for  all  but  favourites 
of  the  Pope  and  the  king.  The  patronage  of  churches 
was  usurped  to  the  detriment  of  private  patrons;  the 

H 


98  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

CFiAP.     appointments  to  bishoprics  were  made  without  regard 
— ^ —     to   the   electoral   rights  of  chapters;    episcopal   right 
of  institution  was  ignored.    Edmund  Eich,  the  primate, 
though  himself  a  papal  nominee,  protested  against  Pope 
A.D.  1240.    and  king,  till  sheer  despair  drove  him  from  his  post 
to   die   in   peace   abroad.      At   the    Council   of  Lyons 
in  1245,  Eoger  Bigod  and  others,  as  deputies  for  the 
realm  of  England,   vainly  demanded   a   relaxation    of 
the  "  execrable  extortions  "  of  the  Pope,  by  which  it  was 
said  sixty  thousand  marks  a  year  passed  from  the  Eng- 
lish Church  into  Italy.    At  a  Parliament  at  Westminster 
in  1246,  a  list  of  grievances  was  drawn  up  and  sent 
with  special  letters  to  the  Pope,  by  each  of  the  great 
bodies  present,  "  the  king,  the  bishops,  the  abbots,  the 
earls,  with   the   whole  baronage,  clergy,  and   people." 
Pope  Innocent  IV.  appears  to  have  answered  haughtily, 
counselling  Henry  to  take  warning  from  the  fate  of 
the  deposed  Emperor  Frederic.     The  king  succumbed, 
and  the  clergy  were  harassed  with  fresh  exactions. 
Grosseteste      King  and  Pope  found  a  resolute  opponent  of  tyranny 
chvirch's      in  Eobort  Grosseteste,  the  guiding  mind  of  Simon  de 
Montfort's   party,   who  became    Bishop  of  Lincoln  in 
1235.     Although    Grosseteste    denounced   the   Papacy 
as  anti-Christian-^  on  his  death-bed,  we  should  err  in 
attributing   his   protests   to    doctrinal    considerations. 
Due  allegiance  to  Eome  as  the  centre  of  Christendom 
he  at  least  allowed ;   but  the  avarice  and  ambition  of 
the   pontiffs    Grosseteste   was    prepared    to    resist    as 
emphatically  as  he  did  the  arbitrary  rule  of  the  English 
king.    When  Innocent  IV.  nominated  an  infant  nephew 

1  Or  rather  perhaps  an  individual  Pope  as  an  Antichrist.  The  special  e\ils 
denounced  by  Grosseteste  were  abuse  of  indulgences,  maladministration  of  patro- 
nage, employment  of  clergy  in  secular  business,  subjection  of  clergy  to  secular 
tribunals,  and  clerical  marriages. 


protector. 


THE   i^TH  CENTURY.  99 

to  a  canonry  at  Lincoln,^  Grosseteste  made  a  bold  and      chap. 

successful  resistance  to  the  appointment.    With  similar     . \^ 

spirit  he  joined  the  committee  of  twelve,  representing 
the  three  estates  of  prelates,  earls,  and  barons,  who 
refused  to  yield  to  Henry's  demand  for  fresh  subsidies  a.d.  1244. 
unless  the  Charter  should  be  confirmed  and  a  Council 
appointed.  Grosseteste  on  this  occasion  emphatically 
declined  to  respect  a  papal  letter  ordering  the  bishops 
to  vote  the  subsidy.  He  wisely  refused  to  hear  of 
any  severance  of  the  clerical  and  lay  interests  in  the 
treatment  of  this  question.  Grosseteste  caused  some 
sensation  by  preaching  at  Lyons  ^  against  the  corrup- 
tions of  the  papal  court  in  1252.  On  one  occasion  he 
successfully  combated  the  attempts  of  the  monks  of 
Canterbury  to  meddle  in  his  diocese  when  the  archiepis- 
copal  see  was  vacant.  Matthew  of  Paris  describes  how 
Grosseteste  was  once  requested  by  Archbishox^  Boniface 
to  examine  a  royal  favourite  who  was  about  to  be  pre- 
sented to  the  see  of  Chichester.  He  complied,  and  set 
the  king's  nominee  aside  on  the  score  of  ignorance. 
Equally  conscientious  was  the  patriot  bishop  in  his 
enforcement  of  discipline  and  reform  of  manners  among 
the  clergy  of  his  diocese.  He  was  a  warm  supporter 
of  the  mendicant  movement,  which  exercised  as  yet 
a  beneficial  influence  in  the  country,  and  he  employed 
the  friars  largely  in  his  diocese.  One  of  his  last  acts 
was  to  procure  a  bull  from  Innocent  sanctioning  a 
visitation  of  the  religious  houses. 

The  reia-n  of  Edward  L,  although  it  did  little  to  Edward 

o  °  resists  the 

lighten  the  burdens  of  the  clergy,  was  really  favourable  Pope,  but 

.  .,.'.,  1  persecutes 

to  their  interests  m  causing  alienation  between  the  two  theciergy. 

i  See  Grosseteste,  Epp.,  ed.  Luard,  18Y  ;  Pegge's  Life,  295. 

*  For  this  sermon,  of  which  copies  were  given  to  the  Pope  and  cardinals,  see 
Brown's  Fasciculus,  ii.  250,  seqq. 


100 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


AD.  1273. 


"  Statute 
of  Mort- 
main." 
A.D.  1279. 


authors  of  oppression.  This  reign  introduced  a  decided 
tendency  to  isolate  England  from  all  continental  in- 
fluences. Hence  emanated  the  idea  of  an  independent 
national  Church,  finally  realized  under  Henry  VIIT. 
Eichard  I.  had  acknowledged  the  emperor  as  his 
suzerain ;  John  and  Henry  had  been  vassals  of  the 
Pope ;  Edward,  though  usually  dutiful  to  Eome,  dis- 
tinctly declared  that  his  realm  was  independent  of  all 
foreign  sovereignties.  His  reign  produced  measures 
directly  detrimental  to  the  papal  pretensions,  but 
indirectly  also  compromising  the  liberties  of  the  clerical 
estate.  Archbishop  Peckham  had  signalized  the  first 
year  of  his  primacy  by  a  bold  attempt  to  maintain  the 
doctrine  of  the  charters.  In  a  Council  held  at  Eeading 
in  August,  1279,  he  issued  articles  to  the  clergy, 
charging  them  to  explain  to  their  parishioners  the 
sentence  of  excommunication  prescribed  against  such 
as  violated  Magna  Charta  and  such  as  obtained  royal 
writs  to  obstruct  ecclesiastical  suits.  Peckham  was 
compelled  by  the  king  to  renounce  these  articles.  It 
was  perhaps  to  retaliate  on  Peckham,  as  well  as  to 
stay  the  growth  of  the  regular  or  monastic  system, 
that  the  celebrated  "  De  Eeligiosis  "  was  passed  in  the 
same  year.  This  Act,  commonly  called  the  "  Statute  of 
Mortmain,"  had  been  devised  by  Burnell,  Bishop  of 
Bath,  Edward's  chancellor.  Its  aim,  as  that  of  the 
subsequent  "  Quia  Emptores  "  (1290),  was  to  prevent 
damage  to  superior  lords  by  transfer  of  property.  A 
large  proportion  of  property  was  at  this  time  in  the 
hands  of  the  monastic  corporations,  and  was  conse- 
quently exempt  from  rendering  knight  service,  from 
reliefs  upon  succession,  and  from  other  feudal  imposts. 
Such  unprofitable  propert}^  was  said  to  be  in  mortmain, 
or  in  dead  hands,  since  as  far  as  the  superior  lord  was 


THE   i^TH   CENTURY.  loi 

concerned  the  holders  mi2;ht  as  well  be  dead.    The  "  De      chap. 


y, 


Eeligiosis  "  prohibited  for  the  future  such  detrimental 
transfers.  Henceforth  all  lands  bestowed  on  persons 
or  institutions  incapable  of  fulfilling  the  legal  obliga- 
tions were  to  be  forfeited  to  the  immediate  lord,  or 
ultimately  to  the  Crown.  One  important  result  of  the 
"  De  Eeligiosis  "  statute  was  the  impulse  given  to  the 
university   system.     Henceforth   the   charitable   were  Theum- 

,  PI  •  versities 

induced  to  bequeath  their  money  for  the  maintenance  supplant 
of   poor  scholars  at  the  universities,   rather   than  for  teries. 
the  foundation  of  monastic  houses.     The   number  of 
monasteries  founded  in  the  fourteenth  century  is  small 
when  compared  with  the  long  list  of  those  which  date 
from   the   Anglo-Norman   reigns.     It   appears    indeed 
that  more  religious  houses  were  founded  in  the  single 
reign  of  Henry  III.  than   in  the  two  hundred  years 
which  separated  Edward  from  Henry  VIII.     By  the  The 
statute    "  Circumspecte   Agatis,"   passed   in    1285,  the  "circum- 
protracted  contest  as  to  the  jurisdiction  of  ecclesiastical  Agatfs." 
courts  was  decided.     The  statute  recognized  the  rights  ^'^'  ^^^^' 
of  the  courts  to  hold  pleas  on  subjects  purely  spiritual, 
i.e.    tithes,    mortuaries,    churches,    churchj^ards ;    and 
offences  for  which  penance  was  due,  to  wit,  injuries 
done  to  clerks,  perjury,  and  defamation. 

On  more  than  one  occasion  Edward  adopted  towards 
the  clergy  a  policy  of  high-handed  tyranny.  In  129-1:, 
when  war  with  France  was  decided  upon  in  Parliament, 
the  king  seized  the  treasures  in  the  sacristies  of 
monasteries  and  cathedrals,  and  proceeded  to  demand 
from  the  clergy  a  half  of  their  revenues.  The  claim 
had  to  be  granted ;  and  it  was  in  vain  that  the  clerical 
representatives  petitioned  for  a  set-off  in  the  repeal  of 
the  "  De  Eeligiosis"  statute.  In  1296,  the  demand  for 
subsidies  was  repeated.     But  Pope  Boniface  VIII.  had 


I02     '  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

just  issued  tlie  bull  "  Clericis  Laicos,"^  forliidcling  the 
clergy  to  pay  contributions,  taxes,  tenths,  hundredths, 
etc.,  to  the  secular  powers.  Archbishop  Winchelsey 
rashly  made  this  bull  the  pretext  for  a  clerical  de- 
murrer to  the  king's  demand.  Edward  at  once  put 
the  clergy  out  of  royal  protection,  and  proceeded  to 
seize  their  chattels.  Some  came  to  terms  with  the 
king  by  private  compacts ;  others  were  despoiled  per- 
force. The  archbishop  persisted  in  a  policy  of  resist- 
ance, and  appears  to  have  himself  escaped  spoliation. 
Edward  as  yet  could  not  afford  to  lose  his  friendship, 
and  therefore  contrived  to  effect  a  reconciliation, 
recline  of        A.   courso   of   lecj-islation    directly   hostile   to   Eome 

the  Papacy.  ^,  '' 

was  rendered  possible  by  the  collapse  of  the  pre- 
sumptuous Boniface,  and  the  consequent  subjection  of 
Boniface  the  Papacy  to  France.  Unworthy  to  be  compared 
with  Gregory  VII.  and  Innocent  III.  in  character  or 
ability,  Boniface  YIIL  (1294-1303)  outdid  these  great 
Popes  in  his  preposterous  exaltation  of  the  Roman 
over  the  temporal  courts.  The  bull  "  Clericis  Laicos," 
which  anathematized  all  princes  who  should  impose 
taxes  on  the  clergy,  has  been  already  mentioned.  The 
more  celebrated  "  Unam  Sanctam  "  announced  that  S. 
Peter's  successor  inherited  the  "  two  swords  "  of  spiri- 
tual and  temporal  supremacy,  and  that  submission  to 
the  Pope  was  absolutely  necessary  to  salvation.  But 
Boniface  VIII.  vainly  tried  to  master  Philip  the  Fair 
as  Innocent  III.  had  mastered  John.  The  contest 
ended  in  the  capture  and  ignominious  treatment  of  the 
pontiff,  who,  driven  to  despair,  committed  suicide. 
With  Boniface  VIII.  there  passed  away  not  only  the 

1  This  bull  appears  to  have  been  specially  aimed  at  Edward  and  Philip  of 
France.  It  pronounces  excommunication  ipso  facto  on  those  who  paj'  or  promise, 
as  well  as  on  those  who  demand  contributions. 


THE   \ZTH  CENTURY.  103 

political  pretensions  of  the  Papacy,  but,  for  a  time  at 
least,  its  very  independence.  Clement  V.,  a  tool  of  the 
French  king,  retired  to  Avignon.  A  period  of  dis- 
graceful subservience  to  France  ensued,  known  as  the 
Seventy  Years'  Captivity  (1309-1378). 

The    tendency   to    resist    papal   encroachment   was  Papai  • 
again  illustrated  in  England  by  the  affair  of  William  ments 
de  Gainsborough.     This  ecclesiastic,  on  his  promotion  '^^^^^^^ 
to  the  see  of  Worcester,  unadvisedly  accepted  a  papal 
bull  investing  him  with  the  temporalities  of  the  see, 
as  well  as  with  spiritual  jurisdiction.    He  was  punished 
with  a  fine,   and   was  compelled  to  acknowledge  the 
king's  power  over  the  temporalities  (1302).     About  the 
same  time  a  subject  who  had  procured  a  bull  of  ex- 
communication from  Eome  against  his  adversary  was 
declared  guilty  of  treason,  and  narrowly  escaped  hang- 
ing.    In  1307,  the  Parliament  held  at  Carlisle  passed 
an  Act  forbidding  the  payment  of  tallages  on  monastic 
property,    and    other   imposts    by   which   money   was 
taken  out  of  England.     At  this  Parliament  a  petition 
from  certain  of  the  laity  was  presented,  praying  for 
legislation    to     restrain    exactions    and     abuses    con- 
nected with  papal  pretensions,  viz.  "  provisions,"  pro- 
motion   of    aliens,    diversion    of    monastic    revenues, 
reservation   of  first-fruits,   and    Peter's    pence.      The 
Parliament   drew   up   a    remonstrance,    but    took    no 
further  measures.     The  king's  death  shortly  followed, 
and  anti-papal  legislation  was  deferred  till  the  reign 
of  Edward  III. 

It  is  not  surprising  to  find  that  during  the  thirteenth  Moral 
century  the  Papacy  was  fast  waning  in  repute — the  o^chm-ch 
pontiff  being  regarded  by  many  as  nothing  more  than  "wa,ning. 
a    foreiorn   extortioner — nor   that    the   whole    Church 
was  infected  with  the  vices  sanctioned  by  its  head. 


I04  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

QIIS.V.  -^  state  of  spiritual  decadence  prevailed  during  this 
^'-  and  the  succeeding  century,  against  which  the  clergy- 
did  not  even  attempt  to  contend.  We  have  noticed 
the  important  part  played  by  the  English  clergy  in 
the  politics  of  the  day.  Work  of  this  kind  monopo- 
lized the  attention  of  the  leading  Churchmen.  They 
were  usually  the  only  persons  of  sufficient  education  to 
shine  as  lawyers,  statesmen,  leaders  of  party,  and 
legislators ;  to  these,  rather  than  to  clerical  em23loy- 
ments,  they  devoted  themselves.  The  larger  benefices 
were  therefore  wholly  neglected,  and  the  duties  of 
diocesans,  where  performed  at  all,  were  i)erformed  by 
bishops  in  partihus,^  or  by  stray  bishops  from  Ireland  and 
the  Continent.  The  Tudor  practice  of  rewarding  court 
favourites  with  livings  was  already  foreshadowed  by 
the  anomaly  of  an  episcopate  and  priesthood  whose  best 
members  were  paid  with  Church  revenues  for  serving 
the  State.  Between  the  incomes  of  these  prelates  and 
the  working  clerg}^  there  was  a  shameful  disproportion. 
Poverty  impelled  the  latter  to  eke  out  a  livelihood  as 
physicians,  surgeons,  or  ecclesiastical  lawyers.  In  the 
latter  profession  there  appear  to  have  been  temptations 
to  venality  and  peculation,  and  petty  trickery.  As 
Dean  Hook  points  out,  a  clergyman  thus  employed 
lowered  himself  in  public  estimation,  if  not  in  fact,  to 
the  level  of  a  modern  pettifogging  attorney.  From  the 
ciersy  and  regulars  the  spiritual  welfare  of  society  received  little 
monks.  ^^  ^^  Consideration,  though  the  religious  houses  con- 
tained   many   persons    in    holy    Orders.      The    great 

>  Of  these  there  was  apparently  a  sufficiency.    Piers  Ploughman  sarcastically 
marvels  that  Mahometanism  is  not  extinct : 

"  So  many  prelates  to  preche, 
As  the  Pope  maketh, 
Of  Nazareth,  of  Nynyve, 
Of  Neptalym,  of  Damaske." 

Vis  ton  XV. 


THE   \ZTH  CENTURY,  105 

monastic  officials  took  as  active  a  j^art  in  politics  as 
the  bishops ;  the  subordinate  brethren  went  through  a 
routine  of  religious  services,  and  spent  the  rest  of  their 
time  in  school  teaching,  in  agriculture,  and  in  literar}'' 
pursuits.  The  literary  pursuits  were,  of  course,  con- 
ceived to  be  idleness  by  the  unlettered  opponents  of 
monasticism ;  but  the  fundamental  evil  in  the  monkish 
system  was  not  idleness,  but  selfishness.  The  maxim 
of  the  regular  was  self-preservation.  He  had  chosen 
the  monastic  life  as  securing  himself  against  damnation. 
Zeal  for  the  souls  of  the  worldly  outside  the  monastery 
walls  was  no  part  of  his  Christianity.  Hence  the 
cure  of  souls  in  benefices  possessed  by  regulars  was  the 
monopoly  of  an  ill-paid  vicar,  the  proceeds  of  the  living 
being  chiefly  devoted  to  the  maintenance  and  aggran- 
dizement of  the  monastery.  Meantime,  it  will  be 
remembered,  the  spiritual  life  of  Christendom  was  being 
sapped  by  the  prevalence  of  superstition  and  by  the 
exaltation  of  a  religion  of  formalism.     The  Holy  Com-  Errors  in 

p  I  .       .  1  doctrine 

munion,  as  the  dogma  01  transubstantiation  won  general  and 
credence,  became  a  priestly  sacrifice  and  nothing  more.  ^^^^  ^^^' 
l^he  congregation  attended  not  as  communicants,  but  as 
spectators.  Commemoration  of  Christian  sanctity  took 
the  form  of  a  superstitious  respect  for  saintly  relics, 
and  these  were,  of  course,  multiplied  by  the  clergy. 
AVhile  these  and  other  superstitions  did  much  to 
obscure  the  light  of  the  Gospel,  the  indiscriminate  use 
of  indulgences  threatened  to  exclude  even  the  light 
of  conscience.  Penance  was  fast  degenerating  into 
something  very  like  a  formal  barter  for  licence  to 
commit  sin. 

The  deerenerate  condition  of  the  Church  had  roused  E-evivaiof 

"  ^  ,  ^  ,  religion  by 

the  zeal  of  the  begging  friars  early  in  the  thirteenth  the  preach- 

.  ,      .,  ,      ,1  T  I  11  ,   ing  friars. 

century.     At   its   outset   the  "  mendicant     movement 


io6  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

may  be  fairly  regarded  as  an  ebullition  of  genuine 
Christian  enthusiasm.  It  was  a  "  revival,"  akin  in 
many  respects  to  that  initiated  by  the  Methodists  in 
the  eighteenth  century.  If  erroneous  in  some  of 
their  doctrinal  tenets,  the  friars  nevertheless  possessed 
the  essential  traits  of  the  successful  missionary — con- 
viction of  the  Gospel's  claims,  self-denial,  fervent  zeal, 
Christian  sympathy,  and  that  peculiar  rhetorical  power 
which  moves  the  illiterate  masses.  In  the  history  of 
such  movements  it  usually  appears  that  unpopularity 
is  the  measure  of  usefulness,  and  that  success  is  ever 
accompanied  by  moral  depreciation.  Impulses  of  this 
nature  are,  in  fact,  curative  or  antagonistic,  and  for  that 
reason  cannot  be  permanent.  When  recognized  by  the 
world  as  commendable  or  even  tolerable,  it  is  because 
they  have  done  their  work  and  are  become  effete,  or 
are  sacrificing  principle  and  drifting  to  hypocrisy. 
The  mendicant  Orders  became  one  of  the  most  per- 
nicious influences  of  their  age.  They  nevertheless 
make  their  first  appearance  as  guilds  of  unexampled 
austerity  and  great  usefulness.  The  origin  of  these 
Orders  may  be  traced  to  the  Spanish  zealot,  Dominic  de 
Guzman,  who,  under  the  patronage  of  Innocent  III., 
A.D.  1216.  foi'ined  an  itinerant  guild  of  "  friars  preachers "  to 
cope  with  the  Albigenses  of  Southern  France.  Dominic's 
plan  was  to  enlist  on  behalf  of  Catholic  dogma  agencies 
hitherto  monopolized  by  the  sectaries :  "  Zeal  must  be 
met  by  zeal,  lowliness  by  lowliness,  false  sanctity  with 
real  sanctity,  preaching  lies  by  preaching  truth." 
Nearly  at  the  same  time  the  enthusiast  Francis  of 
Assisi  sent  out  a  band  of  friars,  who  were  to  preach 
the  Gospel  to  the  poor  in  apostolic  simplicity.  The 
"  Friars  Minorite,"  as  the  Franciscans  in  their  humility 
called  themselves,  were  obliged  to  resign  all  woiidl}'' 


THE    izTH  CENTURY.  107 

possessions,  and  to  depend  on  alms  for  subsistence,  chap. 
Tins  rule  was  afterwards  adopted  by  the  other  Orders  .^^ 
of  friars.  The  extraordinary  assumptions  of  S.  Francis, 
whose  zeal  gradually  degenerated  into  religious  mania, 
gave  the  Order  which  bore  bis  name  a  special  popu- 
larity. In  the  year  1219  the  delegates  to  the  General 
Chapter  of  Franciscans  nnmbered  five  thousand.  The 
Dominicans — here  called  Black  Friars,  and  in  France 
known  as  Jacobins — entered  England  about  the  year 
1221.  They  received  encouragement  from  Ste^Dhen 
Langton,  then  primate.  The  Franciscans  followed  in 
1224.  Several  years  later  came  the  other  two  preach- 
ing Orders,  the  Carmelites  or  White  Friars,  and  the 
Austin  Friars  or  Augustinians.^ 

That  the  mendicant  mission  infused  new  life  into  Their 

'  SU.CCGSS  in 

the  Church  of  England  appears  undeniable.  With  it  England. 
came  a  system  of  evangelizing  unknown  to  the  ad. 
parochial  clergy.  The  preaching  friars  penetrated 
into  places  where  the  parish  priest  was  never  seen — the 
lazar  house,  the  hospital,  the  foul  courts  and  alleys  of 
towns  and  cities,  ignorant  of  learned  phraseology  (the 
Dominican  was  not  even  allowed  to  possess  a  book), 
the  friars  spoke  as  from  heart  to  heart,  relying  on  their 
own  enthusiasm,  their  knowledge  of  human  nature, 
and  some  pretence  to  medicinal  skill.  The  statesman 
bishop,  the  mass  priest  with  his  perfunctory  routine 
of  duty,  the  clerical  summoner  with  his  lawyer's 
appetites,  compared  badly  with  the  new  preaching 
brothers.  They  soon  enlisted  the  sympathy  of  the 
higher  classes,  and  from  the  streets  and  hedges  passed 
into  castles  and  palaces.     Men  of  wealth  were  induced 

^  The  brotherhoods  professing  the  rule  of  S.  Augustine  were  united  in  one 
guild  by  Pope  Alexander  IV,  in  1256.  The  guUd  was  converted  into  a  preaching 
fraternity.  , 


io8 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


CHAP. 
V. 


The  friars 
at  the 
universi- 
ties. 


to  leave  them,  bequests.  That  they  might  enjoy  these 
Gregory  IX.  published  a  bull  relaxing  their  rule  of 
poverty.  In  1245  Innocent  IV.  cancelled  this  restric- 
tion altogether,  claiming  however  that  all  property 
of  mendicant  brotherhoods  should  be  subject  to  the 
disposal  of  the  papal  see.  In  1259  Matthew  Paris, 
the  Benedictine  chi^onicler,  describes  the  magnificent 
buildings  reared  by  the  Franciscans  and  Dominicans, 
and  sneers  at  their  change  of  principle.-^ 

The  sequel  might  have  been  anticipated.  The  friars 
became  greedy  bequest-hunters ;  their  zeal  for  religious 
reform  spent  itself  in  abuse  of  the  parish  priests,  and 
in  defence  of  every  papal  encroachment  on  the  Church. 
In  their  wake  came  a  mob  of  sturdy  vagrants,  wdiose 
friar's  cowl  betokened  nothing  but  a  desire  to  live 
without  working.  Seldom  has  the  irony  of  fate  made 
practice  so  inconsistent  with  principles.  From  "  having 
nothing  " — in  the  words  of  the  popular  taunt — the  friars 
had  come  to  "  possess  all  things ;  "  beginning  as  religious 
enthusiasts  who  despised  book  learning,  they  were 
noted  ere  the  close  of  the  century  as  the  most  pedantic 
of  hair-splitting  controversialists.  The  universities, 
which  had  now  ousted  the  monastic  and  cathedral 
schools,  rang  with  the  endless  disputes  of  Franciscan 
and  Dominican. 

The  mention  of  the  universities  leads  us  to  say  a  few 
words  on  the  course  of  study  at  this  time  fashionable. 
In  the  twelfth  century  the  studies  of  canon  law  and 
scholastic  theology  had  been  added  to  the  ordinary 
educational  curriculum,  which  had  hitherto  comjDrised 
only  the   "  trivium  "  and  "  quadrivium." "     Scholastic 


1  Matt.  Paris,  612. 

2  The  trivium  included  grammar,  logic,  and  rhetoric ;  the  quadrivium,  arith- 
metic, geometry,  music,  and  astronomy. 


THE   \ZTH  CENTURY.  109 

theology,  however,  had  degenerated  since  the  days  of 
Lanfranc  and  Anselm.  Its  professors  now  confined 
themselves  to  wearisome  expositions  of  Peter  Lombard, 
the  high  authority  who  had  published  the  four  "books 
of  sentences."  Under  the  influence  of  the  friars  in  the 
thirteenth  century,  the  system  underwent  another 
change — we  can  hardly  say  for  the  better.  The  works 
of  Aiistotle  had  lately  risen  to  extraordinary  favour, 
and  had  been  translated  and  circulated  under  the 
patronage  of  Frederic  II.  A  miserable  combination  of 
Aristotle  and  Christian  theology  succeeded  the  expo- 
sitions of  the  Sententiarii,  and  a  meagre  system  of 
philosophizing  was  thus  introduced  at  the  universities, 
to  the  utter  exclusion  of  originality  and  critical  inves- 
tigation. The  most  eminent  professors  of  the  new 
scholastic  theology — Alexander  Hales,  Albertus Magnus, 
Thomas  Aquinas,  Duns  Scotns — belonged  to  the  two 
great  brotherhoods.  Inimical  as  the  mendicant  fra- 
ternities were  to  the  parish  priests,  their  invasion  of 
the  universities^  was  succeeded  by  yet  fiercer  antago- 
nism among  themselves.  The  Franciscans  were  Realists, 
the  Dominicans  Nominalists  :  the  former  magnified,  the 
latter  disparaged,  the  power  of  Free  Will;  the  one 
part}''  taught  the  Immaculate  Conception  of  the  Blessed 
Virgin,  the  other  denied  it.  On  account  of  these 
differences  the  universities  were  in  a  continual  state  of 
turmoil.  In  1370  the  satirist  who  wrote  "Piers  Plough- 
man's Creed  "  could  show  how  the  essential  in  religion 
witli  each  Order  was  that  no  other  Order  should  be 
credited. 

The  mendicant  friars  did  as  much  to  strengthen  the  The  fri 

1  The  Franciscans  prpponderated  at  Oxford,  the  Dominicans  at  Paris.  Some 
of  the  greatest  schoolmen  were  educated  at  Oxford,  t.g.  Alexander  Hales,  Duns 
Scotus,  Occam,  and  Bradwardine. 


no 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


CHAP. 
V. 

and  papal 
mal- 
practices. 


Indulg-- 

ences. 


worst  influences  of  the  Papacy  as  to  impair  the  dignity 
of  the  English  clergy.  These  loyal  servants  of  Rome 
were  exempt  from  episcopal  jurisdiction ;  they  were  not 
amenable  to  ecclesiastical  courts,  and  they  could  give 
absolution  in  every  parish.  More  pernicious  still  was 
their  connection  with  the  traffic  in  indulgences.  The 
growth  of  this  practice,  now  sanctioned  by  authority 
and  destined  to  become  the  darkest  blot  in  the  mediaeval 
system,  deserves  the  reader's  attention.  We  have  shown 
how,  in  Anglo-Saxon  times,  elaborate  penitential  systems 
testified  to  the  Church's  anxiety  that  the  repentant 
should  give  practical  proof  of  their  sincerity  before 
restoration  to  Christian  privileges.  It  was  not  un- 
common in  that  period  to  prescribe  a  pilgrimage  as  a 
form  of  penance.  In  the  twelfth  century  enlistment  in 
the  Crusades  took  the  place  of  the  ordinary  pilgrimage. 
Next,  men  were  taught  that  a  papal  absolution  insured 
the  soldier  who  fell  in  this  holy  cause  against  future 
consequences  of  sin.  Payment  to  the  cause  was 
frequently  accepted  in  lieu  of  actual  service.  The 
transition  to  a  s}stematic  sale  of  indulgences  was  made 
easier  by  the  invention  of  the  doctrine  of  "  super- 
abundant merit."  Saintly  excess  of  righteousness,  it 
was  taught,  formed  a  treasury  upon  which  the  Church 
could  draw  for  the  benefit  of  her  living  members.  The 
year  1300 — that  of  Boniface's  jubilee — witnessed  an 
oifer  of  indulgences  of  "  extraordinary  fulness  "  to  all 
persons  who  should  visit  Eome.  The  enormous  wealth 
accruing  to  the  papal  chest  on  this  occasion  perhaps 
suggested  a  further  pervei  sion.  Papal  hawkers,  known 
as  qucBstionarii  or  pardoners,  were  employed  to  sell 
indulgences  to  all  applicants.  This  degrading  employ- 
ment became  the  monopoly  of  the  Dominicans.  The 
student  will  remember  that  it  was  the  spectacle  of  a 


V. 


THE   \yrH  CENTURY,  in 

Dominican  hawking  pardons  that  first  revealed  to  chap. 
Luther  the  corrupt  condition  of  the  Church.  The 
same  sight  had,  however,  roused  the  indignation  of 
honest  and  intelligent  Christians  in  every  country  a 
century  before  the  time  of  Luther.  In  the  next  chapter 
it  will  be  shown  how  the  Lollard  anarchists  prevented 
such  feelings  from  ripening  into  a  reformatory  move- 
ment. 


112 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


Hilde- 
brand's 
theory- 
shattered. 


CHAPTEE  VI. 

^I^f  dFourtccnt!)  ant)  iFiftccntl)  ©enturic^. 

A.D.  1300-1499. 

Hildebrand's  theory  shattered — Doubtful  limits  of  papal  authority — Instances — 
(1)  Usurpation  of  patronage — The  metropolitan  sees — The  suffragan  sees — 
"  Statute  of  Provisors" — (2)  Invasion  of  the  king's  rights — Praemunire  statutes — 
(3)  Pecuniary  exactions— Reformers — John  Wyclif — His  life — His  religious 
system — Dangerous  principles— Reform  consequently  impeded— Other  reformers 
abroad — Legislation  against  Lollardy — Its  aristocratic  champion,  Oldcastle — 
Wyclifs  Bible  suppressed — Bishop  Pecock — Reforming  movement  on  Church 
principles — The  Councils — Reforming  ecclesiastics — Hopeless  condition  of  the 
Church — The  New  Learning. 

In  England,  more  than  other  countries,  the  prestige  of 
the  Papacy  was  lowered  by  the  migration  to  Avignon. 
The  glory  of  St.  Peter's  chair  was  dimmed,  indeed,  in 
the  eyes  of  Englishmen  when  the  Pop6  became  the 
puppet  of  the  dynasty  which  had  experienced  a  Crecy 
and  Poitiers.  After  1 332  the  yearly  payment  to  which 
John  had  pledged  himself  and  his  successors  remained 
in  arrear.  To  send  such  payment  was  virtually  to 
subsidize  a  country  at  war  with  England.  Urban  Y.'s 
demand  for  this  tribute  in  1366  was  met  with  a 
declaration  from  all  estates  of  the  realm  that  Kins: 
John  had  acted  unconstitutionally,  and  it  was  unani- 
mously determined  to  resist  all  such  papal  claims  for 
the  future.  Never  again  did  England  acknowledge 
the  theory  of  Ilildebrand.  How  quickly  the  feudal 
relation  to  Rome  was  forgotten  is  shown  by  the 
language   of  the   articles   of  complaint   against   King 


THE  \\TH  AND  iSTH  CENTURIES.  113 

Richard   in    1399.     The  Parliament   gravely  declared      chap. 
that  Eichard's   appeal   to    Eome   for   corroboration  of        ^]-  _ . 
statutes  was  culpable,  because  the  crown  of  the  realm 
and  the  realm  itself  had  been  "  in  all  time  past  so  free, 
that  neither  the  pontiff  nor  any  other  person  outside 
the  realm  has  a  right  to  meddle  with  the  same." 

On   the   other   hand,   the   papal   claim   to    spiritual  Doubtful 

n  T       ' ,       -I         -r,  limits  of 

supremacy  was  universally  admitted,  it  was  no  easy  papal 
matter  to  define  in  what  way  this  prerogative  could  be  ^^  °"  ^' 
recognized  without  intrusion  on  temporal  interests. 
From  the  time  of  the  collapse  of  the  old  Hildebrandine 
theory  the  mutual  relations  of  England  and  the  Papacy 
become  complicated  and  difScult  to  analyze.  The  best 
method,  perhaps,  of  realizing  these  relations  in  the 
period  before  us  is  to  trace  out  the  history  of  some  of 
the  more  prominent  papal  prerogatives.  It  will  be  seen, 
on  the  one  hand,  that  the  legislation  of  the  thirteenth 
and  fourteenth  centuries  armed  the  nation  with  statutes 
emphatically  condemning  papal  usurpation.  On  the 
other  hand,  it  appears  that  the  connivance  of  the 
sovereign  usually  enabled  the  Popes  to  go  on  acting 
in  defiance  of  these  statutes,  especially  when  the  clergy 
were  to  be  victimized.  Theory  and  practice  were  thus 
at  issue,  and  so  remained  until  the  Eeformation. 

One  of  the  most  baneful  practices  of  the  time  was  instances- 
papal  usurpation  of  patronage.     The  claim  to  appoint  tionof 
to  suffragan    sees  was  based  upon  the  old  papal  pre-  p^^^°^^s'®- 
rogative    of   taking    part    in  the   appointment    of    a 
metropolitan.     The  practice  of  applying  to  Eome  for 
the  pall  has  been  frequently  mentioned.     As  early  as 
the  late  Saxon  period  the  pall  was  deemed  essential 
to  the  office  of  a  metropolitan.     Besides  having  to  pro-  The  metro- 
cure    the  pall  from  Eome,   the  mediaeval  archbishops  sees. 
were  more  or  less  pledged  to    allegiance  by  the  fact 

I 


114  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

CHAP,  of  their  being  lecjaii  nail  or  ex-officio  legates.  Arcli- 
_2il_  bishop  Langton  secured  the  title  legatus  natiis  for 
Canterbury,  with  the  object  of  protecting  the  Church 
from  the  foreign  representatives  of  Kome.  But  this 
appears  to  have  been  a  short-sighted  policy.  The 
legatine  oflSce  of  the  archbishop  strengthened  the  papal 
pretension  that  all  bishops  were  servants  of  Rome, 
without  at  all  precluding  the  mission  of  foreign  legates  ^ 
— legates  a  latere — when  the  Pope  was  powerful  enough 
to  send  them.  The  ex-officio  legation  of  the  English 
primate  dates  from  1221.  A  hundred  and  thirty  years 
later  York  secured  the  same  doubtful  honour  at  the 
instance  of  Archbishop  Thoresby.  All  his  successors  in 
the  northern  primacy  down  to  the  Eeformation  period 
received  the  legatine  commission  and  the  pall.  Lang- 
ton's  primacy  introduced  another  and  a  more  serious 
innovation.  Hitherto  the  election  of  the  metropolitan 
was  conducted  in  England  ;  the  archbishop  elect  went 
to  Eome  for  formal  confirmation  of  his  title.  But 
Langton's  case  gave  a  precedent  for  the  mission  of  an 
English  primate  from  Eome  without  consent  of  king, 
bishops,  or  chapters.  Edmund  was  appointed  in  1234 
in  the  same  way  as  Langton.  So,  too,  Kirkwardby  in 
1273,  and  Peckham  in  1279.  It  was  by  pajDal  "reser- 
vation" of  the  metropolitan  see  that  Eeynolds  was 
appointed  in  1313. 
Thesuffra-  With  rcspcct  to  the  suffragan  sees,  few  attempts 
at  papal  interference  are  heard  of  until  the  thirteenth 
century.     After   the   settlement  of  the  "investiture" 

1  Who  claimed  to  be  superior  to  the  resident  legates.  Of  such  legates  Mr. 
Stubbs  instances  in  the  thirteenth  century  "Otho  and  Olhobon,  and  that  cardinal 
Guy  Foulquois,  who  assisted  Henry  HI.  against  Simon  de  Moiitfort.  Their  visits 
were  either  prompted  by  the  king  when  he  wanted  support  against  the  nation,  or 
were  forced  on  king  and  nation  alike  by  the  necessities  of  foreign  politics." — 
Const.  Hist.,  iii.  p.  300. 


g-an  sees. 


YI. 


THE  \\TH  AND  iSTH  CENTURIES.  115 

controversy  the  chapters  again  enjoyed  the   right   of      chap. 
free  election,  subject  to  the  royal  license  and  approval, 
which  (according  to  the  charter  ceded  to  the  bishops 
by  John)  were  not  to  be  withheld  without  due  cause. 
The  chapter  elected ;  the  archbishop  confirmed  the  elec- 
tion and  gave  consecration;   the   Crown  licensed  and 
gave  the  temporalities  in  exchange  for  a  promise  of 
fealty.     The  Pope  only  intervened  when  these  several 
prerogatives  could  not  be  exercised  harmoniously.    But 
this  contingency  was   of  frequent  occurrence  in   the 
reign  of  Henry  III.,  and  from  being  an  arbitrator  in 
numerous   disputed   elections,    the    Poj)e    became   sole 
elector.      Between    1215    and    126-i    thirty    disputed 
elections   were   referred   to   the   papal   tribunal.     One 
of  these   at   least — an   election   to    the  vacant  see   of 
Winchester  in  1262 — was  settled  offhand  by  the  Pope 
putting  in  his  own  nominee.   This  plan  had  been  already 
adopted  by  Innocent  III.  and  Gregoiy  IX.,  and   the 
precedent  was  soon  established  in  such  a  w^ay  as    to 
extinguish  the  elective  rights  of  the  chapters.     This 
papal  prerogative  was  strengthened  by  the  prevalent 
belief  that  no  bishop  could  be  translated  ^  without  papal 
sanction.      Besides  promoting   the   bishop   translated, 
the  Pope  put  forward  a  claim  to  fill  up  the  see  vacated 
by  his   translation.      This   claim   established,   a   more 
general  invasion  of  the  rights  of  the  chapters  was  easy. 
The  claim  to  "  provision  "  and  "  reservation  "  had  been 
recognized  since  1226^  for  minor  pieces  of  preferment, 
the  fourteenth  century  witnessed  the  extension  of  the 
same  system  to   the   bishoprics.      Between   1317   and 

'  The  practice  of  translating  appears  to  have  been  rare  hitherto. 

°  In  this  year  the  pupal  envoj',  Otho,  came  to  England  and  claimed  for  the  Pope 
two  prebends  in  each  catliedral  church.  The  claim  was  resisted.  But  subsequent 
Popes  extended  this  kind  of  usurpation,  even  to  livings  in  private  patronage. 


ii6 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


"Statute 
of  Pro  vi- 
sors." 
AD.  1351. 


A.D.  1417. 


(2)  Invasion 
of  the 
king's 
rights. 


1334  seYenteen  appointments  to  bishoprics  were  "re- 
served," and  the  practice  continued  unchecked  till 
1350.  In  some  cases  the  Pope  appointed  a  person 
recommended  by  the  king,  but  the  rights  of  the 
cathedral  chapters  were  usually  quietly  ignored. 

The  celebrated  "  Statute  of  Pro  visors  "  (1351),  which 
made  all  persons  receiving  papal  provisions  liable  to 
imprisonment,^  really  did  nothing  to  restore  these 
rights,  and  little  to  put  down  papal  intrusion.  The 
king  and  the  Pope  came  to  an  understanding.  The 
former  asked  the  latter  to  give  provision  to  his 
nominee,  and  this  nominee  was  sent  to  the  chapter  for 
acceptance.  Matters  were  not  much  more  satisfactory 
under  Eichard  IL,  despite  more  Statutes  of  Provisors 
and  Praemunire.  Henry  V.,  however,  restored  to  the 
chapters  the  right  of  election ;  and  while  the  Papacy 
was  itself  contested,  it  was  not  difficult  for  the  arch- 
bishop to  exercise  his  ancient  right  of  confirming  the 
appointments.  When  Martin  V.  made  good  his  claim, 
the  abuse  revived.  Thirteen  bishops  were  "  provided  " 
in  two  years,  and  Archbishop  Chicheley  was  threatened 
with  deprivation  for  not  securing  the  repeal  of  the 
prohibitive  statutes.^  The  reign  of  Henry  YI.  was  a 
signal  era  of  papal  aggress^ion.  Under  Henry  YII. 
and  Henry  VIII.,  however,  roj^al  nominees  appear  to 
have  usually  secured  the  appointments. 

The  statutes  which  defended  the  king's  rights  gene- 
rally against  all  manner  of  papal  encroachments  were 
not  much  more  effective  than  those  v/hich  j)rohibited 

1  25  Edw.  111.  Stat.  iv.  This  statute  also  provided  that  all  preferments  to 
which  the  Pope  should  venture  to  appoint  should  be  forfeited  for  that  turn  to  the 
king. 

"  "  The  execrable  statute  of  prjemunire  "  was  the  special  bugbear  of  Pope 
Martin.  "  By  this,"  he  writes,  "  the  King  of  England  assumes  the  spiritual  juris- 
diction, and  governs  the  Church  as  completely  in  ecclesiastical  affairs  as  if  he  had 
been  constituted  by  Christ  His  vicar." 


THE  \\TH  AND  iSTH  CENTURIES.  117 

usurpation  of  patronage.  The  great  "  Statute  of  Free-  chap. 
munire  " — tliat  of  1393 — had  been  anticipated  by  similar  _1L— 
measures    in   1353  and   1365.^     That   of   1365   was    a  Prseimmire 

.  ,  statutes. 

distinct  appeal  against  papal  encroachment  on  the 
rights  of  the  Crown,  and  was  followed  up  in  the  next 
year  by  the  repudiation  of  the  national  tribute  to 
Eome.  The  term  "  Praemunire "  is  taken  from  the 
terms  in  which  the  writ  against  offenders  was  couched 
— ^' prcemunire  facias,'^  etc.  In  the  statute  of  1393  it  is 
enacted  that  "  whoever  procures  at  Eome  or  elsewhere 
any  translations,  processes,  bulls,  instruments,  or  other 
things  which  touch  the  king,  against  him,  his  crown, 
and  realm  .  .  .  shall  be  put  out  of  the  king's  pro- 
tection, their  lands  and  goods  forfeited  to  the  king's 
use."  This  statute  was  a  response  on  the  part  of  the 
king  to  a  pajDal  bull  which  prohibited  bishops  from 
executing  the  sentences  of  the  royal  courts  in  suits 
relating  to  patronage.  Collusion  between  the  Crown 
and  the  Papacy  usually  prevented  its  operation  in  the 
fifteenth  century.  In  the  sixteenth  it  was  most  un- 
fairly made  use  of  by  Henry  VIII.  for  the  destruction 
of  Wolsey. 

Besides  the  invasion  of  patronage  and  jurisdiction,  (3)Pecu- 
the  pecuniary  exactions  of  the  Papacy  constituted  a  exactions, 
grievance  of  most  serious  character.  Despite  the  pro- 
hibition of  1366,  Eome  continued  to  gather  an  enormous 
tribute  from  England.  Besides  first-fruits  and  pay- 
ments for  bulls  and  dispensations,  there  were  continual 
demands  for  subsidies  for  special  purposes,  as,  e.g.,  for 
crusades  against  the  Turks  or  heretics.  An  official 
collector  was  established  in  England  to  gather  in  these 

1  That  of  1353  is  simply  directed  against  those  who  "annul  judgments  in  the 
king's  courts  "  by  taking  their  suits  abroad.  The  court  of  Rome  is  not  mentioned 
in  this  first  Act  of  Praemunire. 


ii8  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

contributions.  Mr.  Stubbs  points  ont  tliat  "a  series 
of  petitions  against  the  proceedings  of  this  most  un- 
popular official  was  presented  in  the  Parliament  of 
1376,"  and  that  "in  1390  the  king  had  to  reject  a 
petition  that  the  collector  might  be  banished  as  a  public 
enemy."  With  respect  to  the  clergy,  who  were  the 
chief  sufferers,  it  may  be  noticed  that  the  claim  to  the 
first-fruits  of  bishoprics  was  first  made  by  Alexander  IV. 
in  1256.  It  was  resisted  from  time  to  time,  but  vainly. 
In  the  Act  ^  which  bestowed  these  annates  on  the  Crown, 
it  is  stated  that  the  sum  of  £160,000  had  been  paid  on 
this  account  to  the  Pope  between  1486  and  1531. 
Reformers.  Tlicsc  instances  will  enable  the  reader  to  appreciate 
the  kind  of  hold  maintained  by  the  Popes  in  the  age 
preceding  the  Eeformation.  To  the  abuses  in  doctrine 
and  practice  which  had  infested  the  churches  we  have 
already  alluded.  We  have  shown  how  the  mendicant 
friars  of  the  thirteenth  century  had  not  only  failed  to 
effect  a  reformation,  but  had  added  a  fresh  scandal  by 
systematizing  the  sale  of  indulgences.  The  fourteenth 
century,  equally  alive  to  the  degeneracy  of  Christendom, 
failed  as  conspicuously  when  it  attempted  measures 
of  redress.  When  such  men  as  the  author  of  *'  Piers 
Ploughman's  Vision "  ^  bemoaned  the  wholesale  ap- 
pointment of  bishops  in  partihiis,  or  the  officious  inter- 
cession of  the  "pardoners,"  or  when  Fitzralph^  of 
Armao-h  denounced  the  mendicant  orders  in  his 
"  Apology  against  the  Friart^,"  they  probably  only  ex- 

■   23  Hen.  VIII.  c.  20,  stat.  iii.  386. 

"  This  remarkable  work  is  attributed  to  a  priest  named  Eobert  Langland  or 
Loiigland.  According  to  Bale,  he  completed  it  in  1369.  "Piers  Ploagbman's 
Creed  "  is  probably  an  imitation  of  the  "  Vision  "  by  a  later  hand. 

■'  Fitzralph  was  a  man  of  some  note.  He  was  an  eminent  teacher  at  Oxford, 
where  probably  he  imbibed  his  dislike  for  the  friars.  He  took  his  grievances  to 
Avignon,  and  several  prelates  subscribed  to  defray  the  expenses  of  the  suit.  The 
monks,  however,  were  the  party  best  able  to  buy  papal  favour.  The  case  lan- 
guished, and  Fitzralph  died  at  Avignon  iu  I3G1. 


THE  i/^TH  AND  iSTH  CENTURIES.  T19 

pres>ed  sentiments  of  wide  acceptance.  But  liow  were  chap. 
these  abuses  to  be  removed?  This  was  a  question  _Ji_ 
which  Fitzralph  and  Langland,  and  the  scurrilous  pam- 
phleteers who  endeavoured  to  imitate  the  "  Vision  "  and 
the  "  Apology,"  were  all  alike  unable  to  answer.  John 
Wyclif  was,  it  seem^;,  the  first  to  attempt  a  diagnosis  of 
the  disease  for  practical  purposes.  But  in  the  hands 
of  Wyclif's  disciples  remedial  theories  were  quickly 
transformed  into  schemes  of  destruction.  To  these 
succeeded  a  reaction,  for  the  cure  was  worse  than  the 
malady. 

The  early  life  of  this  remarkable  divine  is  wrapped  john 
in  obscurity.  He  appears  to  have  been  born  at  Eich- hisufe. 
mond,  in  Yorkshire,  about  the  year  1322.  He  went  to 
Oxford,  but  of  his  doings  there  we  have  no  record  till 
he  emerges  as  master  or  warden  of  Balliol.  To  another 
person  bearing  a  similar  name  probably  belong  the 
fellowship  at  Merton  and  the  mastership  of  Canterbury 
Hall-^  with  which  John  Wyclif,  the  Eeformer,  has  been 
sometimes  credited.  Equally  unauthentic  is  the  tra- 
dition which  makes  Wyclif  the  author  of  the  "  Last 
Age  of  the  Church,"  a  book  which  is  probably  the  work 
of  a  Franciscan  monk.^  The  treatise  "  On  the  Eeality  of 
Universals,"  written  by  Wyclif  at  Oxford,  shows  that 
he  had  adopted  the  philosophy  of  the  Eealists.  Nomi- 
nalism, the  opposite  school,  had  been  for  some  time  in 
the  ascendant,  and  Wyclif's  work  apj)ears  to  have 
caused  some  sensation.  It  was  probably  before  1365 
that  Wyclif  was  made  a  king's  chaplain.  This  office 
in  the  mediasval  times  was  frequently  the  first  stepping- 
stone  to  political  distinctions.    In  1366  the  Government 

"  So  Robertson,  History,  Book  viii.  chap.  vi. :  for  the  other  view,  see  Lechler, 
John  Wyclif,  vol.  i.  p.  160,  seqq. 
'  See  Shirley,  Introd.  to  the  Fasciculi  Zizaniorum,  xiii. 


I20  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA, 

CHAP,     looked   about  for   a   clerical   cliampion  to  defend    the 
_1[3^     refusal  of  the  arrears  of  tribute  lately  claimed  by  Rome. 
The  roj^al  chaplain  gained  prestige  by  supporting  this 
policy  in  a  public  argument  at  Oxford.     The  employ- 
ment of  prelates  in  high  secular  offices  was,  as  we  have 
seen,  one  of  the  scandals  of  the  age.     The  piactice  w^as 
attacked  at  this  time  by  a  self-seeking  clique  headed 
by  John  of  Gaunt,  Duke  of  Lancaster.     Wyclif,  w^ho 
out  of  regard  for  the  Church's  best  interests  denounced 
a  system  which  sujoplied  the  court  with  intellect  and 
ability  at  the   expense   of   the  diocesan   centres,   was 
compelled  to  serve  under  this  despicable  leader.     The 
most  prominent  representative  of  the  pernicious  s^^stem 
was  William  of  Wjkeham — a  man  whose  virtues  w^ere 
almost  such  as  to  exculj^ate  his  false  position.     Lan- 
caster's party  succeeded  in  ousting  Wykeham's  party 
for  a  time,  and  in  depriving  several  prelates  of  their 
secular  emplo3^ments  (1371).     Wyclif  next  appears  in 
the  political  conference  between  England  and  France, 
which   had   been    arranged   to   take   place   at   Bruges 
AD,  1374.    under   the    superintendence    of   papal    nuncios.      The 
English  Church  availed  itself  of  this  opportunity  to 
send  certain  envoys,  to  petition  the  papal  representa- 
tives for  redress  of   grievances.     W^yclif   was   one  of 
these    envoys.     The  grievances   were   those   which  so 
often  recur  in  the  clerical  gravamens — levying  of  ex- 
actions,   reservation    of    benefices,    interference    with 
bishoprics.     The  complaint  elicited  a  worthless  promise 
of   redress.     Erom    his   experience  at  Bruges,   Wyclif 
probably  learnt  how  thoroughly  demoralized  the  papal 
system  was.     His  learning  enabled  him  to  satisfy  him- 
self that  the  pretensions  which  had  been  so  grossly 
abused  had  little  or  no  foundation.    He  began  to  write, 
lecture,  and   preach   on   the   subject  in   no   measured 


THE  \\TH  AND  iSTH  CENTURIES.  121 

terms.  His  censures^  extended  from  tlie  Pope,  who  chap. 
was  "  Antichrist,  the  proud  worldly  priest  of  Eome,  and  ^]- 
the  most  cursed  of  clippers  and  purse-carvers,"  to  the 
luxurious  prelates  and  ignorant  parish  priests  of  his 
own  country.  These  strictures  were  doubtless  to 
some  extent  prompted  by  political  animosity.  It  was 
imagined,  and  not  without  reason,  that  Wyclif  was 
one  of  the  political  faction  who  aimed  at  a  confiscation 
of  all  ecclesiastical  property.  He  was  accordingly 
summoned  to  S.  Paul's  to  explain  his  invectives  before 
the  primate,  and  Courtenay,  Bishop  of  London.^  At  the 
convention  there  appeared  with  Wyclif  his  political 
allies,  Lancaster  and  Lord  Percy.  The  indecent  be- 
haviour of  the  duke  to  Bishop  Courtenay  provoked  a 
tumult  at  an  early  stage  in  the  proceedings,  and 
Wyclif's  party  narrowly  escaped  the  vengeance  of  the 
infuriated  Londoners.  Meantime  the  Pope  had  dis- 
covered that  Wyclif  was  guilty  of  several  heresies, 
and  a  bull  was  addressed  to  Oxford,  ordering  the  sup- 
pression of  his  teaching.  Oxford  showed  itself  in 
no  hurry  to  obey,  and  Wyclif  acquired  favour  with 
the  Government  of  Eichard  11.  by  arguing  that  the 
king  could  prohibit  exportation  of  treasure  even  when 
demanded  by  the  Pope.  Lancaster's  influence  was 
much  diminished  by  the  death  of  Edward  III.,  and  a.d.  1377. 
henceforward  Wyclif's  cause  ceased  to  be  discredited  by 
this  unworthy  supporter.  The  schism  which  followed 
the  death  of  Gregory  XL  saved  him  from  papal  ven- 
geance, and  for  the  future  he  had  chiefly  to  reckon  with 
the  prelates  of  his  own  country,   who  were  offended 

1   Lewis,  Life  of  Wyclif,  31,  35-38. 

-  "  The  character  of  the  prosecution,"  says  Canon  Robertson,  "is  shown  by  the 
fact  that,  although  errors  of  doctrine  had  already  been  laid  to  his  charge,  those 
which  were  now  brought  forward  related  entirely  to  political  and  social  (questions,'* 
— History,  Book  viii.  chap,  vi. 


vr. 


122  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

CHAP,  by  his  atfacks  on  clerical  property  rather  than  his 
nnorthodoxy.  That  the  protests  of  these  antagonists 
Avere  not  nnreasonable  was  proved  in  1381,  when  Wat 
Tyler's  insurrection,  and  the  murder  of  Archbishop 
Sudbury,  showed  how  dangerous  a  spirit  now  animated 
the  lower  orders.  It  is  absurd  to  argue  that  this 
socialist  outbreak  is  attributable  to  Wyclif.  But  it 
is  as  absurd  to  deny  that  the  communists  would  have 
found  in  Wyclif s  writings,  had  they  read  them,  a 
justification  of  their  principles.  From  this  time 
Wyclif  s  hold  on  the  upper  classes  was  loosened.  His 
unpopularity  was  increased  when  his  new  opinions 
concerning  the  Eucharist  were  made  known.  These 
were  r&probated  even  in  quarters  where  his  attacks 
on  Rome  had  found  readiest  acceptance.  Oxford  ex- 
pelled its  great  schoolman;  a  Council  at  London,  under 
the  new  primate,  Courtenay,  condemned  nine  of  his 
opinions  as  heretical,  and  fifteen  as  erroneous  (1382). 
Three  of  his  followers  were  subjected  to  punishment ; 
and  it  is  not  easy  to  understand  how  Wyclif  escaped, 
unless  we  accept  his  enemies'  testimony  that  he  baffled 
his  accusers  by  an  evasive  and  quibbling  line  of  de- 
fence. Wyclif  retired  to  his  rectory  at  Lutterworth 
in  1382.  He  died  in  1384.  Shortly  before  his  death 
he  is  said  to  have  received  a  citation  to  appear  before 
Urban  VI.  It  appears  that  these  two  years  of  retire- 
ment were  by  no  means  a  season  of  inactivity.  It 
was  at  this  time  that  he  published  his  pamphlets  "  On 
the  Schism  "  and  "  Against  the  Pope's  Crusade,"  and 
the  most  pronounced  of  bis  doctrinal  treatises,  "  The 
Trialoffue."  It  is  also  recorded  that  he  was  assiduous 
in  his  duties  as  a  parish  priest,  and  that  the  country 
surrounding  Lutterworth  was  for  some  years  a  noto- 
rious centre  of  "  Lollavdism." 


THE  \\TH  AND  iSTH  CENTURIES.  123 

The  chief  merit  in  Wyclif  s  system  was  that  which,  chap. 
a  hundred  and  fifty  years  later,  secured  Protestantism  _J[L_ 
its  extraordinary  success.  Against  the  objective  re-  Hisreii- 
ligion  of  the  mediaeval  Church,  with  its  manifold  per-  system. 
versions  of  doctrine  and  practice,  Wyclif  set  up  a 
religion  of  individuality  based  on  an  internal  apprehen- 
sion of  the  Saviour's  atoning  merits.  This  religion  was 
to  be  formed  exclusively  from  the  Scriptures.  He 
accordingly  proceeded  to  publish  a  vernacular  transla- 
tion of  the  whole  Bible.  It  is  a  much  controverted 
point  whether  this  publication  was  regarded  as  a 
dangerous  novelty,^  or  whether  the  suppression  of 
Wyclif  s  Bible  is  not  fully  accounted  for  by  the  great 
Reformer's  socialist  theories  and  so-called  heresies, 
which  it  was  presumed  might  be  promulgated  by  its 
circulation.  Passing  from  his  broad  principle  of  reform 
to  doctrinal  details,  we  find  the  most  salient  heresy 
of  Wyclif  was  his  opinion  concerning  the  Eucharist. 
Rejecting  all  teachers  since  the  year  1000,  with  the 
sole  exception  of  Berengarius,^  Wyclif  took  that  view 
of  the  Sacrament  which  was  afterwards  adopted  by 
Cranmer,  and  which  has  been  explained  in  our  Church 

1  Against  this  assumption  the  men  of  the  Old  Learning  protested  in  the  six- 
teenth century.  Sir  Thomas  More  writes  thus :  "  The  whole  Bible  was,  long  before 
AV'yclif  s  days,  by  virtuous  and  well-learned  men  translated  into  the  English  tongue, 
and  by  good  and  godly  people  with  devotion  and  solemnness  well  and  devoutly 
read."  With  reference  to  Arundel's  constitution  prohibiting  Wyclif's  version. 
More  remarks,  "  This  order  neither  forbade  the  translations  to  be  read  that  were 
done  before  Wyclif's  days,  nor  condemned  his  because  it  was  new,  but  because  it 
was  naught."  It  must,  however,  be  remembered  that  More  was  strongly  prejudiced, 
and  may  have  based  such  stitements  on  hearsay  evidence.  Between  the  Saxon 
period  and  the  time  of  Wyclif,  only  two  translators  are  known  to  us  by  name. 
Early  in  the  reign  of  Edward  III.,  William  of  Shoreham  rendered  the  Psalter  into 
English  prose.  Shortly  afterwards  the  same  portion  of  Scripture  was  translated 
by  Richard  Rolle,  "  the  hermit  of  Hampolf,"  with  the  addition  of  a  commentary. 
The  study  of  the  Bible  in  the  Vulgate  Version  was,  of  course,  encouraged  before 
Wyclif's  time.  We  find  Grosseteste  advising  the  Oxford  students  to  devote  the  best 
morning  hours  to  scriptural  studies,  "  in  accordance  with  ancient  customs  and  the 
example  of  Paris."     See  Seebohm,  Oxford  Reformers,  p.  3. 

•  See  Fasciculi  Zizaniorum,  114  ;  and  compare  Wyclif  s  Trialog.,  ii.  7,  p.  153. 


124  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

CHAP.  Catechism.  The  Sacrament,  according  to  Wyclif,  was 
_ZL^  not  a  mere  sign ;  the  Body  of  Christ  was  in  it  virtually, 
spiritually^  and  sacrameutally.^  But  it  was  not  in  it 
"  substantially."  As  the  accidents,  so  the  material 
substance  of  the  bread  and  wine  remained  after  con- 
secration. In  other  words,  Wyclif  maintained  the 
doctrine  of  the  Eeal  Presence,  but  rejected  the  dogma 
of  transubstantiation.  Unfortunately,  a  number  of 
fantastic  and  pernicious  tenets  were  also  held  by 
Wyclif.  They  were  for  the  most  part  evolved  from  his 
favourite  proposition,  "  Dominion  is  founded  upon 
grace."  The  Reformer  argued  that  all  kinds  of  do- 
minion were  granted  by  God  on  condition  of  obedience 
to  His  commandments.  Disobedience  cancelled  the 
grant.  It  is  easy  to  see  how  from  such  premises 
Wj^clif  reached  the  conclusion  that  the  ministrations 
of  bishops  and  priests  who  are  in  mortal  sin  are  null.^ 
It  is  also  plain  that  confiscation  of  the  unworthy  rich 
and  deposition  of  inefficient  princes  could  be  logically  de- 
duced from  them  by  the  socialist  fanatics.  Wj^clif 
seems,  however,  not  to  have  gone  thus  far ;  he  qualified 
his  propo.sitions  with  the  statement,  "  God  must  obey 
the  devil  in  this  world,"  meaning  that  evil  must  often 
prevail  over  good.  The  modification  thus  strangely  ex- 
pressed was,  of  course,  misunderstood  by  his  adversaries,^ 
and  probably  gave  greater  ofience  than  the  propositions 
lie  sought  to  tone  down.  Priests  and  deacons  were 
conceived  by  Wyclif  to  be  the  only  orders  instituted 
in  the  primitive  times.  The  "  Ca^sarean "  bishops  he 
accordingly  designates  as  lesser  Antichrists ;  *  the  great 

1  Trialog.,  iv.  4,  p.  256  ;  9,  pp.  274,  275  :  see  Fasciculi  Zizaniorum,  107. 

2  An  opinion  which  is  disallowed  in  the  Articles  of  our  Church  (Art.  XXVI.). 
Wyclit's  words  are,  "NuUus  e^t  dominus  civilis,  nullus  tpiscopus,  nuUus  est 
praelatus,  dum  est  in  peccato  mortali."  See  Shirley,  Introd.  to  F.  Z.,  Ixiii. ; 
'i'rialog.,  iv.  19  ;  Walsingham,  ii.  53. 

^  See  Shirley,  Ixiv,  *  Trialog,,  iii.  17. 


THE  i^TH  AND  iSTH  CENTURIES.  125 

Antichrist  predicted  in  Scripture  lie  supposes  to  be  the 
Pope.  But  most  of  the  evils  in  the  Church  are  ascribed 
by  Wyclif  to  the  existence  of  endowments.  Against 
these  he  directed  his  most  passionate  invectives, 
actually  arguing  that  it  was  a  greater  sin  in  Con- 
stantine  to  endow  the  Church  than  it  w^as  in  Paul  to 
persecute  it.^ 

When  we  reflect  that  opinions  so  discordant  with  the  Dangerous 
spirit  of  the  age  were  usually  couched  in  whimsical  ^^^^^^^'  ®^' 
and  exaggerated  language,  we  cannot  wonder  that 
Wyclif's  religion  of  individuality  and  free  inquiry  was 
palatable  to  few  besides  crazy  fanatics  and  gi'eedy 
socialists.  Wyclif's  theories  had,  indeed,  only  to  be 
pushed  to  a  legitimate  extent  to  make  Christianity  in- 
tolerable to  society.  In  so  speaking  we  cannot  except 
the  theory — afterwards  endorsed  by  some  Protestant  sects 
— that  all  religion  is  to  be  got  from  the  Bible,  each  reader 
being  his  own  commentator.  In  effect,  the  Lollards 
found  it  as  easy  to  prove  that  Biblical  patriarchs 
married  within  the  degrees  of  consanguinity,  or  that 
the  early  Christians  were  communists,  as  their  master 
had  found  it  to  prove  that  bishops  were  one  with 
priests  in  the  Apostolic  age.  For  many  years  after 
Wyclif's  death  England  teemed  with  turbulent  persons, 
whose  sanctimonious  professions  cloaked  a  desire  to 
hasten  to  opulence  at  their  neighbour's  expense.  It 
was  un scriptural  for  ecclesiastics  to  possess  property. 
It  was  scriptural  that  "  the  saints,"  i.e.  themselves, 
should  "  possess  the  earth."  It  was  scrijDtural  to  main- 
tain opinions  with  which  the  vagaries  of  mediaeval  the- 
ology contrasted  as  the  mote  with  the  beam.  Such  were 
the  natural  results  of  Wyclif's  appeal  to  popular  io-no- 
rance.     The   educated   were   soon   convinced  that   the 

'  Trialog.,  iv.  17,  18. 


126 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


other 

reformers 
abroad. 


Bible  was  dangerous  reading  for  the  populace,  and 
measures  were  taken  to  prohibit  the  circulation  of 
W'yclif  s  version.  Worse  still,  a  deep-rooted  prejudice 
was  established  in  the  upper  classes  against  all  schemes 
for  reforming  the  Church.  Especially  apparent  was 
this  feeling  among  the  nobility.  Now,  in  fact,  as  often 
since,  the  burning  house  of  the  clerical  Ucalegon  was 
too  perilous  to  his  lay  neighbour  to  be  a  gratifying 
spectacle.  Much  of  the  legislation  against  the  Lollards 
is  really  illustrated  by  the  Parliamentary  petition  of 
1413,  imploring  Henry  IV.  to  silence  those  who  in- 
veighed against  tenure  of  property  by  ecclesiastics, 
"  because  "  (huch  is  the  excuse  of  the  lay  lords  for  pro- 
tecting the  clergy)  "  it  is  very  likely  that  in  process  of 
time  they  will  also  excite  the  people  of  your  kingdom 
to  take  away  from  the  said  lords  temporal  their  posses- 
sions and  heritages." 

In  several  parts  of  the  Continent,  and  notably  in 
Bohemia,  opinions  resembling  those  of  Wyclif  survived. 
Occasionally  the  principle  of  salvation  by  personal 
faith  was  presented  in  its  purity,  without  detriment  to 
order  and  discipline,  and  without  sanction  to  individual 
conceit.  The  "  Friends  of  God,"  and  the  "  mj^stics," 
Eckart,  Tauler,  Gerson,  and  Hameiken  (better  known 
as  Thomas  a  Kempis),  may  be  instanced  as  burning 
and  shining  lights  in  an  age  of  deej)  darkness,  and 
from  them  the  sacred  fire  was  handed  down  to  a  more 
favoured  generation.  But  of  the  much-vaunted  name 
of  Wyclif  no  such  abiding  influence  can  be  predicated. 
VVyclifism  disappears  from  view  save  as  the  creed  of 
a  wrong-headed  and  turbulent  few.  When  the  day  (;f 
English  reformation  arrived,  it  does  not  appear  that 
our  Reformers  professed  sympathy  wiih  the  eccentric 
schoolman. 


THE  \\TH  AND  lyrH  CENTURIES.  127 

The    legislation    against    Lollardy    is    particularly 
noticeable,  because  it  habituated  England  to  that  prin- 
ciple  of    extirpating    religious    error   by  brute   force,  Legislation 
which  m  the  sixteenth  century   is  so  amply  and  un-  LoUarciy. 

A.  D 

happily  illustrated.  As  early  as  1381  the  sheriffs  had  1381-1415. 
been  ^  charged  to  arrest  and  bring  to  trial  the  Lollard 
preachers,  as  men  who  sowed  "  discord  and  dissension" 
and  "  excited  the  people  to  the  great  peril  of  the  realm." 
The  accession  of  the  Lancastrian  dynasty  inaugurated 
a  severer  course  of  action.  Burning  was  already  the 
nominal  punishment  of  heresy  by  the  common  law ; 
but  only  one^  case  of  its  infliction  is  recorded  before  the 
year  1400,  when  Parliament  passed  the  statute,  "De 
Haereticis  Comburendis."  ^  The  preamble  charges  the 
Lollard  preachers  with  "  wickedly  instructing  and  in- 
flaming the  people,  and  as  much  as  they  may,  exciting  and 
stirring  them  to  sedition  and  insurrection."  The  statute 
orders  that  all  persons  convicted  of  teaching  heresj'' 
must  either  renounce  their  errors  or  be  delivered  over 
by  the  bishop  to  the  mayor  or  sheriff,  "  who  shall  bring 
them  before  the  people  to  be  burnt."  The  progress 
of  the  socialist  movement  under  Sir  John  Oklcastle  led 
to  a  supplementary  Act  in  the  reign  of  Henry  V., 
according  to  which  all  judges,  sheriils,  etc.,  were  to  be 
sworn  to  extirpate  Lollardy.'*  William  Sawtrey,  a 
London  priest,  was  the  first  victim  of  the  statute  of 
1400.     Other  ordained  men  suffered  within  the  next 

1  5  Kich.  II.  c.  5. 

2  It  is  recorded  that  in  1222  a  deacon,  who  had  been  perverted  to  Judaism,  was 
ijondemned  at  Oxford  and  burnt  or  (according  to  Matthew  Paris)  hanged.  Ann. 
Wykes.,  p.  63;  Matt.  Paria,  p.  315. 

^  2  Hen.  IV.  c.  15. 

*  Henry  VIII.  repealed  the  "De  Htereticis  Comburendis,"  to  replace  it  by  an  Act 
which,  while  making  allowance  for  the  transfer  of  papal  supremacy  to  himself, 
re-enacted  the  punishment  of  burning  for  heresy,  and  also  facilitated  the  legal 
j)rocess  by  diminishing  the  precautions  hitherto  taken  with  respect  to  informers. 
The  penalty  was  not  finally  abolished  till  1077. 


128 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


Its  aristo- 
cratic 
champion, 
Oldcastle. 


twenty-five  years,  viz.  William  Thorpe,  William 
Taylor,  and  the  monk  Garentin.  But  the  majority  of 
the  victims  were  small  tradesmen  and  illiterate  persons. 
The  number  of  those  who  suffered  was  not  great ;  and 
in  criticising  this  Act  we  must  bear  in  mind  that  the 
safety  of  the  country  depended  on  the  suppression  of 
these  turbulent  and  licentious  sectaries.  To  complain 
that  the  instrument  of  suppression  sanctioned  a  punish- 
ment of  fearful  cruelty,  is  merely  to  complain  that  it 
was  the  statute  of  a  mediaeval  Parliament. 

To  the  aristocracy  LoUardy  was,  as  we  have  already 
observed,  almost  as  offensive  as  to  the  clergy.  Never- 
theless, one  person  of  rank  was  found  to  head  the 
Lollard  rioters  of  the  reign  of  Henry  V.  Sir  John 
Oldcastle,  who  married  the  widow  and  claimed  the 
title  of  Lord  Cobham,  is  supposed  to  be  the  original  of 
Shakespeare's  Falstaff.^  He  appears  to  have  inferred 
from  the  dissolute  character  of  Prince  Henry's  youth 
that  the  throne  might  be  overthrown  by  a  republican 
league.  Accordingly,  on  the  death  of  Henry  IV.,  Old- 
castle attached  himself  to  the  Lollard  faction.  He  hired 
agents  to  raise  disturbances  in  the  dioceses  of  London, 
Eochester,  and  Hereford.  He  also  caused  menacing 
placards  to  be  posted  on  the  doors  of  the  London 
churches,  affirming  that  the  Lollards  were  prepared  to 
rise,  a  hundred  thousand  strong.  Oldcastle  was  appre- 
hended, and  the  king  himself,  mindful  of  former  friend- 
ship, endeavoured  to  argue  with  him.  This  failing,  he 
was  tried  before  Archbishop  Arundel  and  excommuni- 
cated.^ The  civil  powers  subsequently  committed  him 
to  the  Tower.     Oldcastle  appears  to  have  expressed  a 


1  Sec  Collier's  Shakespeare,  Introd.  to  "Henry  IV." 

-  See  the  report,  "Processus  contra  Johann.  Oldcastle,"  quoted  at  length  in 
Hook's  Archbishops,  chap.  xvii. 


THE   i^TH  AND   iSTH  CENTURIES.  129 

disbelief  in  the  doctrine  of  transubstantiation  and  the  chap. 
efficacy  of  pilgrimages.  In  view  of  these  opinions,  Foxe  — I^ 
represents  the  demagogue  as  a  martyr,  and  the  primate  as 
a  "beast,"  "wolf,"  "Caiaphas,"  and  "bloody  murderer." 
Whether  Oldcastle  was  in  any  true  sense  a  religious 
man  is  really  unknown.  He  contrived  to  escape  from 
the  Tower,  and  lay  concealed  in  Wales  for  four  years. 
During  this  time  he  appears  to  have  kept  up  his  com- 
munications with  the  revolutionary  faction. ^  A  riot 
was  raised  by  the  Lollards  in  St.  Giles's  Fields.  Sir 
John  was  shortly  afterwards  discovered  and  made  an 
example  of.  The  scene  of  the  riot  was  appointed  as 
the  place  of  execution.  Its  manner  denoted  the  two- 
fold offence — treason  and  heresy — the  criminal  being 
first  hung  in  chains  and  then  burnt. 

The  measures  for  suppressing  the  Lollard  Bible  were  wyciif  s 
probably  suggested   by  Archbishop   Arundel   himself,  presled?'' 
The   provincial  synod  of  Canterbury  held  at  Oxford  ^^  ^^^^' 
(1408)   issued   the   celebrated   "  Constitutions "  which 
bear  his  name.     These  forbid  all  preaching  unlicensed 
by  the  diocesan — thus  silencing  both  the  popish  friars 
and  the  Lollard  preachers — and  prohibit  the  reading 
of  Scripture   in    Wyclifs   English   version.      The  in- 
accuracy of  the  version  and  the  seditious  designs  of 
those   who   circulated   it  perhaps    sufficiently    explain 
such   enactments.      Other    translations,    such    as    the 
clergy  had  been  wont  to  place  in  the  hands  of  educated 
laymen,  were,  of  course,  not  suppiessed ; ^  and  it  ap- 

1  In  1414  a  proclamation  was  issued  by  the  Government,  charging  the  Lollards 
with  the  intention  of  constituting  Sir  John  Oldcastle,  of  Couling,  in  the  county  of 
Kent,  regent  of  the  realm.     Fcedera,  ix.  170. 

2  Such  was  the  interpretation  put  on  the  constitution  by  the  great  lawyer. 
Bishop  Lyndwood,  about  twenty-two  years  afterwards :  "  Ex  hoc  quod  dicitur 
'  noviter  conipositus '  apparet  quud  libros  libellos  vel  tractatus  in  Anglicis  vel  alio 
idiomati  prius  translates  de  texta  ScripturiE  legere  non  est  prohibitum." 

E 


130 


ECCLESIA  ANGLICANA. 


CHAP. 
VI. 


Bishop 
Pecock. 


pears  from  Arnndel's  "  Constitutions  "  that  a  vernacular 
version,  authorized  by  a  provincial  council,  was  already 
contemplated.^  The  theory  that  religious  thought  was 
suppressed  at  this  period,  as  it  was  in  the  reigns  of 
the  Tudors,  appears  to  lack  confirmation.  What  lax 
opinions  with  regard  to  the  established  doctrines  and 
practices  of  the  Church  were  sometimes  openly  preached 
may  be  gathered  from  the  career  of  Eeginald  Pecock. 

This  free-thinking  and  somewhat  unscrupulous  pre- 
late has  been  erroneously  classed^  with  the  sectarian  or 
anti-Eoman  party.  Eeally,  he  was  chiefly  notorious 
as  an  ultra-Eomanist.  He  was  educated  at  Oxford, 
and  became  a  fellow  of  Oriel  in  1417.  He  distin- 
guished himself  in  the  Church,  and  in  1444  became 
Bishop  of  St.  Asaph  by  means  of  a  papal  provision  and 
prepayment  of  some  portion  of  the  episcopal  revenue. 
This  was  an  offence  against  the  "  Preemunire  "  statutes, 
but  Pecock  defended  his  conduct  by  arguing  that  all 
ecclesiastical  property  belonged  originally  to  the  Pope. 
On  similar  grounds  he  argued  in  favour  of  papal  pen- 
sions and  the  payment  of  annuities.  Pecock's  enuncia- 
tion of  these  opinions  caused  great  indignation  among 
his  brother  bishops.  He  incurred  no  punishment,  how- 
ever, and  was  subsequently  translated  to  Chichester. 
Pecock  inclined  to  the  theory  broached  by  Wyclif, 
that  all  the  tenets  of  Christiaiiity  are  to  be  extracted 


1  The  Constiti;tions  prohibit  the  introduction  of  any  new  translation  till  it  "  shall 
be  approved  either  by  the  bishop  of  the  diocese,  or,  if  necessary,  by  a  provincial 
council." — Wilkins'  Concil.,  iii.  317.  No  version  received  conciliar  sanction,  but  if 
Sir  Thomas  More  is  to  be  believed,  other  translations  than  Wyclif  s  sometimes 
received  a  kind  of  episcopal  licence  for  private  use  :  "  Myself  have  seen  and  can 
show  you  Bibles  fair  and  old,  which  have  been  known  and  seen  by  the  bishop  of 
the  diocese,  and  left  in  laymen's  hands  and  women's,  to  such  as  he  knew  for  good 
and  catholick  folk,  that  used  it  with  soberness  and  devotion." 

-  See  Foxe,  the  martyrologist.  It  is  amusing  to  find  this  imaginative  writer  hold- 
ing a  brief  for  the  most  pronounced  "  papist "  of  his  day,  simply  because  he  was 
accused  of  heresy. 


THE   i\TH  AND   \^TH  CENTURIES.        131 

from   the  New   Testament,   studied  apart  from   other      chap. 
ecclesiastical  literature.     ThuB  restricting  the  field  of       ^- 
inquiry,  he  was  led  to  reject  not  only  transubstantia- 
tion,  but  also  some  of  the  fundamental  doctrines  of 
Christianity — our   Saviour's   descent   into  Hades,  and 
the  operation  of  the  Holy  Spirit.     This,  at  all  events, 
was   the   charge  brought  against  him.      But  Pecock's 
theological     position     is     somewhat    unintelligible — 
wholly  so  to  those  who  make  him  a  genuine  Lollard. 
He  certainly  maintained  very  strongly  the  supremacy 
of  the  Pope,  giving  the  Papacy   a  divine  institution, 
and  making  all  episcopal  authority  emanate  therefrom. 
At  the  same  time  he  took  a  broad,  intelligent  view  of 
such  usages  as  pilgrimages  and  adoration  of  images ; 
and  against  clerical  celibacy  he  emphaticall}^  inveighed. 
His   want    of  patriotism   in   policy,    rather   than    his 
peculiar  views  in  religious  matters,  led  to  his  expulsion 
from  the  House  of  Lords  in  1457.     The  next  year  his 
heretical  opinions  were  the  subject  of  an  examination 
conducted   by  Archbishop  Bouchier.     It  appears  that 
what  specially  irritated  his  inquisitors  was  Pecock's 
crafty   exaltation   of  the   Pope   over   Councils.     This, 
however,  Bouchier   did  not  care  to  say  plainly.     He 
condemned  Pecock  as  heretical  for  his  audacious  denun- 
ciations  of  the    Councils.      Menaced   with   the   usual 
penalty,  Pecock  saved  himself  by  abjuring  his  oj^inions. 
His  deprivation  and  a  bloodless  sacrifice  of  his  books 
satisfied  the  authorities,  but  the  populace,  "  inflamed 
into  fury  against  the  man  who  exalted  the  Pope  above 
the    Church,"  ^   were   with    difficult}^    prevented    from 
rabbling  him.     The  bishop  had  suffered  in  the  cause  of 
the  Pope.     Three  papal  bulls  were  therefore  launched 
against  Bouchier  in  vindication  of  Pecock.     But  the 

^  See  Hook's  account,  Archbishops,  vol.  v.  chap.  xsi. 


132  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

CHAP,     only  result  was  that  the  papal  client  was  committed  to 

— ^ —     stricter  confinement.     He  escaped,  however,  the  more 

serious  penalties  of  prcemunire,  and  was  allowed  to  end 

his  days  at  Thorney  Abbey,  in  enjoyment  of  everything 

except  liberty. 

Reforming:       Pecock's  mcdlcv  of  opinious  will  not  secure  him  a 

movement  .  inp-  !••  t 

on  Church  placc  m  tlic  rauKs  of  reforming  ecclesiastics.  It  must 
not,  however,  be  imagined  that  the  cause  of  reforma- 
tion found  no  worthier  champions  at  this  period  than 
the  English  Lollards  or  their  congeners  abroad,  or  that 
sober-minded  Churchmen  were  blind  to  abuses  which 
had  been  made  the  pretext  for  sectarian  extravagances. 
To  some  of  the  "  mystic "  or  "  pietist "  school  of 
reformers  within  the  Church  we  have  already  alluded ; 
and  an  age  in  which  the  "Imitation  of  Christ"^  was 
written  and  extensively  circulated  can  hardly  be  con- 
sidered quite  void  of  spiritual  life.  The  need  of 
reformation  was  the  constant  theme  of  pulpit  oratory. 
The  attempts  on  the  part  of  individuals  and  of  Churches 
to  probe  the  wounds  of  Western  Christendom  were  at 
least  earnest,  if  ineffectual.  It  is  impossible  in  such  a 
work  as  this  to  do  more  than  indicate  some  few  of  these 
attempts.  Foremost  we  rank  the  proceedings  at  the 
great  Church  Councils.  These  Councils,  in  seeking  to 
effect  amendment,  seriously  disparaged  the  assumptions 
of  the  Papacy.  The  Seventy  Years'  Captivity  had 
ended  in  1378,  to  be  succeeded  by  the  deeper  disgrace 
of  a  two-headed  Papacy.  In  dealing  with  this  anomaly 
the  Church  reasserted  the  ancient  principle  that  Popes 
are  subordinate  to  General  Councils.  The  legation  of 
cardinals  which  proposed  to  the  English  Church  this 
solution  of  the  question  at  issue  was   received   with 

1  Probably  written  by  Thomas  Hamerken  of  Kempten,  canon  of  Zwoll  (died 
1741). 


THE   \\TH  AND   i^TH   CENTURIES.         133 

enthusiasm.  At  Pisa  (1409),  Constance  (1415),  and 
Basle  (1431),  earnest  attempts  were  made  to  effect  a 
reformation  of  the  Church.  England  sent  to  Pisa  a  The 
gravamen  worthy  of  her  Church.  The  most  flagrant  ^^o^^^^^^- 
abuses  in  English  Christianity  were  declared  to  be  the 
appropriation  of  benefices  by  religious  houses  and  State 
officials,  who  made  insufficient  provision  for  the  spiritual 
charge  of  the  parishes — the  non-residence  of  bishops, 
who  were  often  aliens  ignorant  of  the  native  tongue — 
the  purchase  of  papal  favours  with  bribes — and  the 
exemption  of  monastic  houses  from  episcopal  control. 
These  abuses  are  summed  up  in  a  memorial  which  was 
prepared  at  Oxford  and  laid  before  the  Council  of  Pisa 
by  the  chief  English  delegate,  Hallam,  Bishop  of  Salis- 
bury. The  representatives  of  Christendom  at  these 
three  Councils  doubtless  accepted  it  as  a  principle  that 
the  root  of  the  evil  lay  in  the  unwarrantable  pretensions 
of  the  Papacy.  The  Council  of  Pisa  deposed  and  excom- 
municated both  the  rival  Popes  in  favour  of  a  new 
nominee.  The  Council  of  Constance  distinctly  declared 
that  Popes  were  inferior  to  (Ecumenical  Councils,  and 
removed  the  wicked  John  XXII.  from  the  pontificate. 
The  Council  of  Basle,  which  deposed  Eugenius  IV., 
proceeded  to  abolish  annates,  expectatives,  provisions, 
and  reservations,  and  restored  to  the  chapters  and 
metropolitans  the  right  of  appointing  to  benefices.  The 
decrees  of  Basle  were  embodied  in  the  Pragmatic 
Sanction  of  1438.  They  were  accepted  by  Pope 
Nicholas  V.  But  subsequent  Popes  indignantly  re- 
pudiated the  guiding  principle  of  these  Councils.  The 
supremacy  of  the  pontiff  over  Councils  was  reasserted, 
and  the  Church's  attempt  to  secure  reformation  by 
conciliar  action  was  thus  made  fruitless. 

Besides  united  action,  attempts  were  made  by  leading 


134 


ECCLESIA  ANGLICANA. 


ecclesi 
astics 


Hopeless 
condition 
of  the 
Cliurcli. 


ecclesiastics  to  reform  abuses  in  their  own  provinces. 
In  Spain,  Cardinal  Ximenes  undertook  a  sweeping 
Keforming  visitation  of  the  monasteries  (1495).  In  England, 
Archbishop  Morton  had  applied  to  Innocent  YIII.  for 
a  bull  empowering  him  to  conduct  a  similar  work  (1489). 
The  duty  subsequently  devolved  on  Cardinal  Wolsey. 
At  Florence,  Savonarola  waged  war  against  the  vices 
of  society  with  a  sincerity  and  earnestness  which  more 
than  condone  his  many  errors. 

But  decrees  of  Councils  and  individual  exertions 
were  alike  powerless  against  evils  which  literally  lay 
at  the  heart  of  Christendom.  The  Papacy  exhibited 
in  the  person  of  Alexander  VI.  the  most  detestable 
of  all  its  representatives.  Not  long  afterwards  came 
Leo  X.,  who,  in  order  to  build  S.  Peter's,  re-estab- 
lished the  practice  of  hawking  indulgences.  This 
period  closes  on  a  scene  of  general  depravity,  which 
Cardinal  Bellarmine  thus  describes :  "  Some  years 
before  the  rise  of  the  Lutheran  and  Calvinistic 
heresy,  according  to  the  testimony  of  those  who  were 
then  living,  there  was  almost  an  entire  abandonment 
of  equity  in  the  ecclesiastical  judgments,  in  morals 
no  discipline,  in  sacred  literature  no  erudition,  in 
divine  things  no  reverence :  religion  was  almost 
extinct."  ^  Perhaps  the  best  influence  was  that  intel- 
lectual revival  which  in  the  next  century  served  as  the 
handmaid  of  theology,  and  powerfully  aided  the  work 
of  reformation.  As  yet,  however,  it  was  little  more 
than  a  resuscitation  of  mental  energy,  having  little  in 
common  with  Christianity,  and  nowhere  less  than  in 
Rome  itself.  The  importance  of  Greek — a  study  lately 
revived — in  the  field  of  theological  research  was  as  yet 
hardly  recognized.     In  so  speaking,  we  may  make  an 

1  Concio,  sxviii.,  Opp.  vi.  296. 


THE   \\TH  AND   iSTH  CENTURIES.  135 

honourable  exception  in  favour   of  England.     In  tbe      chap. 
hands  of  such  men  as  Colet  and  Grocyn,  Linacre  and        ^]' 
Warham,  the  literary  impulse  had  already  assumed  a 
theological   and   a    practical    bearing.     By   these   and  The  New- 
other  English  scholars  the  facilities  offered  by  the  New 
Learning  for  the  study  of  early  Christian  literature 
were  rightly  valued.     The  connection  of  such  studies 
with  religious  reform  was  consequently  appreciated  at 
Oxford  some  years  before  the  Protestant  movement  in 
Germany.      The  work  of  these  educational  reformers 
will  be  noticed  in  the  next  chapter. 


136  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


CHAPTER  VII. 

A.D.  1509-1534. 

Marriage  with  Catharine — Protestantism — Its  history — Its  principles — Its  un- 
scientific character — Its  schismatic  tendency — Its  relation  to  the  English  Refor- 
mation— The  English  Church  under  Wolsey — Wolsey's  downfall— Other  Ee- 
formers  at  the  universities — The  divorce  question — Result  of  negotiations  with 
Rome — The  appeal  to  the  universities — Cranmer  becomes  primate  and  decides 
the  question — Anti-papal  legislation — Papal  licences  and  bulls  prohibited — 
The  king's  ecclesiastical  supremacy — The  Commons  extort  the  "  submission  of 
the  clergy" — Annates,  etc.,  prohibited  at  the  instance  of  Convocation — "Statute 
for  the  Restraint  of  Appeals  "—Negotiations  with  the  Pope  resumed  to  no 
purpose — Papal  interference  in  bishoprics  prohibited — The  separation  is  accom- 
plished, the  clergy  acquiescing. 

Arthur,  the  eldest  son  of  Henry  VII.,  had  died  in 
1502,  shortly  after  his  marriage  with  Catharine, 
daughter  of  Ferdinand  and  Isabella.  A  scheme  sug- 
gested itself  to  the  grasping  English  king* for  retaining 
the  large  dowry  and  the  political  advantages  which 
were  accessories  to  this  alliance.  Henry,  the  heir  to  the 
throne,  a  boy  of  eleven  years  of  age,  should  be  betrothed 
to  his  brother's  widow.  Appeal  was  made  to  Rome  for 
a  dispensation  sanctioning  this  irregular  union,  and  it 
is  noticeable  that  at  the  outset  it  was  urged — with 
what  truth  is  now  unknown — that  the  marriage  of 
Arthur  and  Catharine  had  never  been  consummated. 
So  grave,  however,  were  the  objections  to  a  union 
between  persons  thus  related,  that  two  Popes  refused  to 
accede  to  the  king's  request.     Julius  II.  was  at  length 


HENRY   VIII .  137 

persuaded  to  grant  a  full  dispensation,  allowing  chap. 
Catharine  to  marry  Henry,  even  if  the  marriage  with  ^Z^ 
his  brother  had  been  consummated  (1504).  Even  now 
it  seemed  probable  that  no  use  would  be  made  of  the 
sanction  thus  hardly  won.  Eeligious  scruples  and  a 
rupture  with  Spain  combined  to  induce  Henry  YII.  to 
relinquish  the  scheme,  and  the  young  prince  was  per- 
suaded to  repudiate  his  marriage  contract  with  all 
requisite  formalities  before  Fox,  Bishop  of  Winchester 
(1506).  Even  now  the  avaricious  sovereign  could  not 
face  the  prospect  of  resigning  Catharine's  dowry.  Nego- 
tiations with  the  Spanish  court  were  renewed,  and  the 
formal  repudiation  was  considered  cancelled.  Prince 
Henry  grew  up  cheerfully  accepting  this  strange 
alliance  as  his  destiny,  and  when  he  succeeded  to  the 
throne  at  the  age  of  eighteen,  his  Council  urged  the 
speedy  fulfilment  of  his  father's  scheme.  Accordingly, 
on  June  3,  1509,  King  Henry  VIII.  was  married  to 
Catharine  of  Aragon.  Though  his  bride  was  eight 
years  his  senior,  the  happiness  of  the  king's  union  was 
for  many  years  all  but  complete.  The  exception  was 
in  the  matter  of  children ;  several  times  Catharine  had 
been  delivered,  but  only  one  child,  and  that  a  girl,  was 
the  surviving  issue.  During  this  period  of  Henry's 
reign  the  management  of  affairs  political  and  eccle-  a.d. 
siastical  was  confided  almost  exclusively  to  Thomas 
Wolsey,  a  devoted  minister,  whose  energy  made  ample 
amends  for  the  youthful  king's  dihinclination  for 
business. 

The  conduct   of  ecclesiastical   matters   in   England  protestant- 
during  Wolsey 's  administration  will   be  noticed  here-  h:^ory.^ 
after.      The  student's  attention  must  for  the  present 
be  directed  to  the  great  religious  changes  now  taking 
place  on  the  Continent.     We  have  seen  how  general 


138  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

CHAP,     and  how  hopeless  was  the  yearning  for  religious  reform 
■  J^J"^  ■    in  the  preceding  century.      In   the  Protestant  move- 
ment these  pent-up  feelings  at  length  found  adequate 
expression.     The  origin  of  this  movement  was  a  dispute 

A.D.  1517.  between  Martin  Luther,  an  Augustinian  monk  and  pro- 
fessor of  theology  at  Wittenberg,  and  John  Tetzel,  a 
Dominican  employed  by  Leo  X.  to  hawk  indulgences. 
From  impugning  papal  indulgences,  Luther  went  on 
to  assail  other  notorious  abuses  in  the  Roman  system. 
Against  these  he  inveighed  in  the  "  Tract  against 
Popedom  "  and  "  The  Babylonish  Captivity."     Though 

A.D.1521.  Luther's  opinions  were  condemned  by  the  princes  and 
prelates  of  the  empire  at  the  Diet  of  Worms,  they  soon 
sained  numerous  and  influential  adherents.  The  anti- 
papal  agitation  became  connected  with  the  intellectual 
revival  mentioned  in  the  preceding  chapter,  and  its 
promoters  were  usually  known  as  the  men  of  the  New 
Learning,  a  designation  which  of  right  belonged  to 
educational  reformers  who  had  nothing  to  do  with  the 
Lutheran  movement.     When  the  second  Diet  of  Spires 

A.D.  1529.  deferred  the  subject  of  religious  reform  till  a  General 
Council  should  be  called,  the  new  religionists  "pro- 
tested "  against  the  prorogation,  and  thus  precipitated 
a  schism.  The  societies  in  which  they  were  incorporated 
were  hence  called  "  Protestant."  Protestantism  found 
adherents  in  all  grades  of  society.  It  included  pious 
and  learned  divines  who  longed  for  doctrinal  reform. 
It  appealed  to  such  men  of  rank  as  grudged  the  clergy 
their  social  and  political  dignity,  no  less  than  to  those 
who  sincerely  regretted  the  moral  degradation  of  the 
Church.  The  lower  orders  welcomed  a  system  which 
seemed  conducive  to  civil  and  religious  liberty.  In 
many  places,  indeed,  the  new  scheme  of  religion 
assumed  that  socialist  character  which  had  tainted  the 


HENRY   VIII.  139 

Lollard  system.     The  seditious  teaching  of  the  fanatic      chap. 
Miinzer  and  the  gross  immoralities  of  the  Anabaptist     — ^-i^ 
section    were,    however,    emphatically    disowned     by 
Luther.      The   new   religion    became    the   basis   of  a 
political    union,    and    a    protracted    war    was    waged 
between  the  emperor  and  the  allied  Protestant  princi- 
palities.    Of  this  war  we  need  only  say  that  it  ended 
in   a   compromise   at  Augsburg,  whereby  the   Protes- 
tants of  the  empire  secured   toleration   by  promising  a.d.  1555. 
loyalty. 

The  principles  asserted  by  the  Protestant  Eeformers  its 

•       Trm-  n  •  'ixi  principles. 

must  now  be  noticed.  Their  adversaries  might  nave 
urged  that  on  almost  every  point  of  doctrine  the 
leaders  of  the  Protestant  movement  were  at  variance. 
Nevertheless  certain  definite  hypotheses  lay  at  the 
base  of  all  the  new  systems  of  the  sixteenth  century, 
and  justified  a  claim  to  aflSnity  where  outward  unity 
was  unattainable.  The  disciples  of  Luther,  Melancthon, 
Zuingle,  Calvin,  all  maintained  that  the  medieeval 
system,  with  its  machinery  of  propitiatory  masses,  in- 
dulgences, works  of  satisfaction,  and  works  of  superero- 
gation, had  caused  men  to  undervalue  personal  faith  in 
the  Saviour.  Individual  appreciation  of  the  fact  of 
the  Atonement  was,  they  agreed,  the  end  and  aim  of 
Christianity.  The  means  employed  by  the  Church  to 
secure  this  were,  some  illegitimate,  some  inefficient, 
many  unduly  aggrandized  so  as  to  be  themselves  ends 
rather  than  means.  A  new  system  must  therefore  be 
develoj)ed :  and  since  all  subsequent  periods  in  Church 
history  had  been  more  or  less  corrupt,  the  "  re-forma- 
tion" must  be  based  on  the  Gospels  and  such  other 
relics  of  the  Apostolic  age  as  the  Church  had  included 
in  her  canon  of  Scripture.  For  such  a  second  creation 
of  Christian  religion  the  recent  literary  impulse,  with 


140 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


Its 

schismatic 

tendency. 


its  revival  of  the  study  of  Greek,  might  seem  to  have 
offered  great  facilities.  But  by  Luther  and  the  Pro- 
testant doctors  the  questions  which  this  remodelling  of 
Christianity  revived  were  submitted  to  the  adjudica- 
tion, not  of  scholarship,  but  of  individual  proclivity, 
and  this  was  considerably  biased  by  the  recoil  from 
the  Church's  system.  The  relative  value  of  the  several 
New  Testament  writings — even  the  genuineness  of  some 
— had  first  to  be  accurately  determined.  But  the  deci- 
sion of  the  Protestants  on  these  points  was  so  arbitrary 
as  to  be  worthless.  S.  James's  Epistle  insisted  on  the 
efficacy  of  good  works,  and  this  efficacy  had  been  over- 
rated by  the  mediaeval  Church  ;  therefore  this  Scripture 
was,  according  to  Luther,  "  an  epistle  of  straw."  On  the 
other  hand,  S.  Paul,  writing  to  men  who  had  mounted 
to  Christianity  from  Judaism,  had  said  much  aboiit  the 
superiority  of  personal  faith  to  religion  of  system. 
Personal  faith  was  the  Protestant  panacea;  therefore 
the  basis  of  the  new  Christianity  was  St.  Paul's  Epistles, 
rather  than  the  Gospels  or  other  New  Testament 
Scriptures. 

When  the  Protestant  doctors  got  beyond  these 
elementary  questions,  they  found  it  impossible  to  agree 
about  the  nature  and  efficacy  of  the  sacraments,  the 
extent  of  free-will  in  man,  the  relations  of  faith  and 
works  in  the  scheme  of  salvation,  the  form  of  govern- 
ment to  be  adopted  by  Christian  bodies,  and  the  duties 
of  Christians  to  the  civil  authorities.  Schisms  conse- 
quently ensued,  and  the  Protestant  movement  resulted 
in  the  production  of  many  disintegrated  societies.  Some 
of  these  differed  from  the  Catholic  Church  of  the 
early  ages  only  in  points  of  discipline.  Many  of  them, 
however,  evolved  from  the  Scriptures  systems  by  which 
personal  faith  was  made  to  sanction  or  excuse  gross 


HENRY   VIII .  141 

immorality  and  insubordination  to  all  constituted 
authority.  The  increase  of  Protestant  sects  has  created 
in  modern  times  a  belief  in  the  right  of  "  private 
judgment "  in  religious  matters.  Such  a  belief  would 
seem  to  be  a  logical  deduction  from  the  premises  of 
Protestantism.  It  must  be  noted,  however,  that  the 
early  Protestant  doctors,  and  their  Puritan  successors 
(both  of  whom  punished  what  they  considered  heresy 
with  death),  persistently  disowned  it. 

The  new  system  obtained  a  hold  in  Denmark,  its  relation 
Sweden,  and  Scotland,  which  was  destined  to  be  English 
permanent.  The  tenure  of  Protestantism  in  France,  the  tion°^™'^' 
Low  Countries,  and  Southern  Germany  was  for  various 
reasons  more  precarious.  In  England  its  principles 
were  thoroughly  sifted  during  the  "  Eeformation 
period,"  the  ascendant  being  gained  now  by  the  State 
Churchman,  now  by  the  Komanist,  now  by  the  Puritan. 
This  period  of  transition  ranges  over  some  hundred  and 
thirty  years.  Its  progress  was  illustrated  by  many  new 
religious  formularies,  of  which  the  Thirty-Nine  Articles 
of  1571,  and  the  Canons  and  Catechism  of  1604,  are 
the  chief  survivors,  and  by  repeated  revisions  of  the 
Use  of  Sarum,  of  which  our  Liturgy  is  the  final  out- 
come. The  earliest  of  these  publications  is  the  Ten 
Articles  of  1526  ;  the  last  is  the  Prayer-Book  of  1662, 
which  has  received  no  additions  of  doctrinal  importance. 

Such  a  transition  was  rendered  possible  by  a  change  in 
the  political  constitution  of  the  Church,  which,  though 
contemporaneous  with  the  Lutheran  movement,  was 
not  connected  with  it  either  in  origin  or  purpose,  and 
to  which  England  had  really  been  drifting  ever  since 
the  accession  of  Edward  I.  The  change  we  allude  to 
was  the  formal  repudiation  of  papal  supremacy — a 
repudiation    enforced    by    King    Henry    VI 11.    from 


142 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


CHAP. 
VII. 


The 

Englisli 

Chiircli 

under 

"Wolsey. 


questionable  motives,  but  welcomed  by  most  English 
Churchmen  as  a  measure  which,  without  impairing  the 
catholicity  of  their  country,  opened  the  way  for  long- 
desired  ecclesiastical  reforms.  These  internal  reforms 
were  carried  on  throughout  Henry's  reign,  seldom  with 
singleness  of  aim,  but  always  without  detriment  to  the 
Church's  continuity.  In  the  administration  of  Edward's 
Erastian  Council  the  foreign  Protestants  found  a  coign 
of  vantage,  and  at  that  time  assimilation  to  the  new 
and  hastily  formed  continental  systems  seemed  imminent. 
Through  this  crisis,  however,  the  English  Church  passed 
without  loss  of  Apostolical  succession  or  Catholic 
doctrine;  and  at  no  subsequent  time  was  anything 
done  that  invalidated  her  claim  to  be  the  very  society 
planted  by  Augustine,  or  that  merged  her  among  the 
new  creations  of  Protestantism.  She  repudiated  the 
media3val  doctrine  of  papal  supremacy,  yet  remained 
Catholic;  she  appropriated  the  real  fruits  of  the  con- 
tinental revolution,  yet  never  became  a  sect. 

A  brief  account  of  the  administration  of  Wolsey  will 
illustrate  the  condition  of  the  English  Church  just 
before  this  formal  severance  from  Eome.  It  will  be 
borne  in  mind  that  for  years  past  good  men  had  recog- 
nized the  necessity  of  a  reform  in  the  English  Church, 
though  unable  to  mark  out  the  lines  on  which  such 
reform  should  be  based,  and  entirely  averse  to  any- 
thing like  doctrinal  change.  Of  such  persons  Cardinal 
Wolsey  is  a  favourable  type.  The  character  and  the 
reforming  influence  of  this  great  statesman  appear  to 
have  been  undervalued  in  consequence  of  the  mis- 
representations of  contemporaries  who  profited  by  his 
disgrace,  or  were  in  other  ways  interested  in  dis- 
paraging him.  Impartial  modern  historians  have 
vindicated  Wolsey's   fame  and  acknowledged  the  ser- 


HENRY  VIII.  143 

vices  he  rendered  in  preparing  England  for  the  Eefor-  chap. 
mation.  Thomas  Wolsey  appears  to  have  been  born  ^I^L. 
of  hnmble  parentage^  at  Ipswich,  in  1471.  He  took 
his  degree  at  Oxford  at  an  unusually  early  age,  be- 
came a  fellow  of  Magdalen,  was  recommended  to  the 
notice  of  Henry  VII.  by  Fox,  Bishop  of  Winchester, 
and  was  Dean  of  Lincoln  when  Henry  VIII.  suc- 
ceeded to  the  throne.  With  the  young  king  Wolsey's 
influence  was  from  the  first  great,  and  gradually  be- 
came paramount.  He  was  made  Bishop  of  Lincoln 
and  Archbishop  of  York.  In  1515  he  was  appointed 
to  the  Chancellorship,  and,  according  to  the  evil  custom 
of  the  time,  received  the  sees  of  Durham  and  Win- 
chester in  commendam  to  enable  him  to  bear  the  2:reat 
expenses  of  this  office.^  In  the  same  year  Henry's 
influence  with  the  Pope  procured  him  promotion  to  the 
cardinalate.  As  a  cardinal  he  took  precedence  of  the 
primate  Warham,  and  the  administration  of  the  Church 
of  England  was  in  his  hands  from  this  time  till  his 
death.  Zealous  for  the  reform  of  the  Church,  and  per- 
haps stimulated  by  the  example  of  Cardinal  Ximenes  in 
Spain,  Wolsey  applied  to  the  Pope  for  a  licence  enabling 
him  to  conduct  a  visitation  of  the  English  monas- 
teries. Leo  X.  was  somewhat  suspicious  of  Wolsey's 
fidelity  to  the  Papacy,  and  tried  to  put  this  busi- 
ness into  the  hands  of  an  Italian,  Cardinal  Campeggio. 
The  king,  however,  refused  to  recognize  Campeggio's 
legatine  authority  unless  Wolsey  was  associated  with 
him  in  the  commission.     Eventually  Wolsey  was  made 

1  The  tradition  that  his  father  was  a  butcher  originated  in  a  misunderstood 
witticism  of  Charles  V.  Alluding  to  the  execution  of  Buckingham,  the  emperor 
said  that  the  best  "buck"  in  England  was  destroyed  by  a  "  butcher's  dog,"  im- 
plying, of  course,  that  Henry  was  a  butcher  and  Wolsey  his  obsequious  servant. 

2  Mr.  J.  H.  Blunt  remarks  that  Wolsey's  mission  to  Fiance  alone  cost  him 
£10,000.  Henry  recouped  him  on  this  occasion  by  making  bim  Abbot  of 
S.  Albans :  see  Ellis,  Orig.  Letters,  III.  1.  274. 


144  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

CHAP,     sole  legate  for  a  short  period.    By  the  special  request  of 
^^'       theking^  this  period  was  extended  ;  and  at  last  Clement 
VII.  allowed  the  legateship  to  be  held  for  life.     After 
the  cardinal's  downfall,  and  when  a  breach  with  Eome 
was  in  contemplation,  Henry  had  the  audacity  to  fine 
»     the  English  clergy,  as  rendered  liable  to  a  prcemunire  by 
their  acknowledgment  of  Wolsey's  legatine  authority. 
Wolsey  hoped  to   put  the  monastic  system  in  accord 
with  the  spirit  of  the  age  by  a  reorganization  which 
should  benefit  the  universities.    The  larger  houses  were 
merely  to  be  purged  of  abuses ;    the  smaller   he  pro- 
posed to  suppress  by  drafting  their  inmates  into  the 
larger.      The   revenues   thus   gained   were  to  be  em- 
ployed in  facilitating  education  at  Oxford  and  Cam- 
brid2:e.     The  contrast   between  this  excellent   scheme 
and  the  work  of  vandalism  subsequently  executed  by 
Cromwell   at   once   suggests   itself.      Twenty   of  the 
smaller  and  really  useless  houses  were  actually  sup- 
pressed in  this  way  by  Wolsey,  and  their  revenues^ 
A.D.  15S0.    devoted  to  the  foundation  of  the  college  now  known  as 
Christ  Church.     Seven  professorships,  the  endowments 
of  which  were  in  later  years  appropriated  by  the  king, 
were  also  established  at  Oxford.     At  both  universities 
Wolsey  offered  liberal  patronage  to  the  "  New  Learn- 
ino- "  properly  so  called,  i.e.  to  the  study  of  Greek  and 
patristic  theology.     In  thus  befriending  the  educational 
centres  of  the  Church,  Wolsey  seems  to  have  recog- 
nized that  the  real  stronghold  of  the  sectarians  who 
were  now  flocking  in  from  Germany  was  the  ignorance 
and  mental  degradation  of  the  English  clergy.     Both 
universities  were  at  this  time  slightly  infected  with 

1  "  Intercessione  etiam  prsefati  Heurici  Regis." — Brewer's  Calend.  State  Papers, 
1216  ;  Rymer,  xiii.  739. 

2  S.   Frideswide,   the  largest,  together  with  the  adjoining  Canterbury  Hall, 
formed  the  nucleus  of  the  new  college. 


HENRY   VI I L  145 

LiitlieranisTn,  and  by  his  rational  and  lenient  treatment  chap. 
of  what  he  believed  to  be  heresy  Wolsey  showed  him-  — ^-L^ 
self  quite  beyond  his  age.  Warham  in  vain^  urged  him 
to  burn  the  Oxonian  Lutherans.  The  cardinal  was 
content  to  confute  them  in  argument,  and  compel  their 
attendance  at  a  holocaust  of  heretical  literature. 
Protestant  books,  in  fact,  rather  than  Protestant  persons, 
were  the  victims  of  Wolsey's  orthodoxy.  His  forcible 
suppression  of  these  was  justified  by  the  irreverent 
tone  of  such  treatises  as  "  the  Babylonish  Captivity," 
and  b}^  the  scurrilous,  even  blasphemous,  tendency''  of 
the  subsequent  productions  of  the  Protestant  press. 
But  it  was  directly  necessitated  by  the  fact  that  Henry 
had,  notwithstanding  Wolsey's  remonstrances,^  taken 
the  ultra-Roman  line  in  his  answer  to  Luther.  Besides 
facilitating  theological  studies  at  the  universities, 
Wolsey  proposed  to  benefit  the  Church  more  directly 
by  an  extension  of  the  episcopate.  The  bishops  of  the 
Middle  Ages  were,  as  we  have  seen,  too  much  burdened 
with  State  duties  to  do  their  work  as  Church  officers. 
Wolsey  proposed  to  relieve  the  lords  spiritual  of  much 
of  their  responsibility  by  creating  twenty-one  new 
bishoprics  out  of  the  revenues  of  useless  monasteries. 
Only  six  of  these  were  allowed  to  survive  when  the 
administration  of  the  Church  passed  into  the  rapacious 
hands  of  Cromwell.  Another  project  of  Wolsey's  was 
the  amalgamation  of  the  two  Houses  of  Convocation,  a.d.  1523. 
This  change  would  have  greatly  facilitated  the  de- 
spatch of  reformatory  measures.    Wolsey  unfortunately 

1  See  Warham's  letter,  Ellis,  Orig.  Letters,  III.  i.  239. 

2  "On  June  24,  1518,  Secretary  Pace  had  written  to  the  cardinal  that  the  king 
was  pleased  with  some  signs  of  commendation  which  Wolsey  had  at  lengtli  sliown. 
He  is  very  glad  to  have  noted  in  your  Grace's  letters  tliat  his  reasons  be  called  in- 
evitable, considering  your  Grace  was  sometime  his  adversary  therein,  and  of  con- 
trary opinion." — Brewer's  Calend.  State  Papers. 

L 


\ 


146 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


CHAP. 
VII. 


"Wolsey's 
downfall. 


Oct.  1529. 


did   not  succeed  in  recommending  it  to  the  southern 
House. ^ 

Such  were  the  most  striking  features  in  Wolsey's 
administration.  It  will  be  convenient  to  carry  on  the 
history  of  the  reforming  cardinal  to  its  melancholy 
close.  As  early  as  1525,  Wolsey's  unpopularity  with 
a  jealous  aristocracy  seems  to  have  shaken  his  in- 
fluence over  Henry.  Eoyalty  itself  had  been  dis- 
satisfied with  Wolsey's  way  of  dealing  with  the 
monasteries  and  the  sectaries.  No  part  of  the  monastic 
revenue  had  fed  the  insatiable  cravings  of  the  royal 
treasury ;  ^  and  (to  borrow  the  words  of  the  subsequent 
indictment)  Henry  considered  the  cardinal  to  have 
been  "  an  impeacher  and  disturber  of  due  and  direct 
correction  of  heresies."  But  the  immediate  cause  of 
Wolsey's  downfall  was  his  inability  to  further  the 
king's  wishes  in  the  matter  of  the  divorce,  an  inability 
which  Henry  was  induced  by  Anne  Boleyn  to  mis- 
interpret. It  would  have  been  creditable  to  Wolsey 
had  the  imputation  of  unwillingness  to  aid  in  "  the 
king's  matter "  been  deserved.  The  one  dark  blot  on 
his  fame  is  that  he  unscrupulously  devoted  his  energies 
to  this  unworthy  cause,  and  was  thus  involved  in 
intrigues  of  disgraceful  character.  His  sin  found  him 
out,  when  it  became  plain  that  the  Pope  had  been 
duping  Henry,  and  that  it  was  not  intended  that  the 
question  should  be  settled  by  legates,  or  in  England. 
Wolsey  suffered  as  the  papal  legate,  though  he  was 
in   no   way  accessory  to  the  Pope's   policy.     He   was 


1  The  two  Houses  would  have  sat  together  as  a  legatine  synod,  with  Wolsey 
for  president.  The  southern  Convocation,  perhaps,  regarded  this  arrangement  as 
impairing  the  dignity  of  the  primate  of  Canterbury. 

2  "These  noble  lords,"  writes  the  French  ambassador,  "imagine  that  the 
cardinal  once  dead  or  ruined,  they  will  incontinently  plunder  the  Church  and 
6trip  it  of  all  its  wealth." — Le  Grand,  Histoire  du  Divorce,  iii.  374. 


HENRY   VIII.  147 

suddenly  deprived  of  the  chancellorship  and  proceeded  chap. 
against  under  the  "  Praemunire  "  statutes.  B^^  the  verdict  — ^^ 
of  the  law  courts,  all  his  possessions  were  forfeited  to 
the  king.  Even  now  it  seemed  likely  that  Henry 
would  let  him  end  his  days  in  the  retirement  of  his 
northern  see  (Feb.  1530).  Wolsey  was  actually  at 
Cawood  Castle,  preparing  to  be  enthroned  in  York 
Minster,  when  fortune  dealt  its  last  and  fatal  stroke. 
He  was  informed  that  some  secret  correspondence  with 
the  King  of  France  had  been  betrayed  to  Henry,  who 
had  put  an  evil  construction  on  it,  and  that  he  was 
to  be  taken  to  the  Tower  on  a  charge  of  high  trea- 
son. Throughout  his  reverses  Wolsey  had  displayed 
little  fortitude.  He  was  now  so  overcome  that  his 
health  became  fatally  impaired.  He  journeyed  as 
far  as  Leicester   Abbey,  and  there  died  of  a  broken  Nov.  30. 

,  ,  1530. 

heart. 

Contemporaneously  with  Wolsey  there  had  flourished  other 

\  -^  "^  .      .  Reformers 

a  distinguished  group  of  Reformers  of  similar  type — men  at  the 
who  wished  to  use  the  intellectual  revival  in  the  service  sities. 
of  religion,  and  to  purge  the  Church  of  the  super- 
stitious accretions  of  a  darker  age  without  impairing 
its  catholic  character.  It  is  these  men  we  have  to 
thank  for  that  sober  and  inquiring  spirit  which  in- 
fused itself  into  the  assemblies,  of  the  sixteenth-century 
divines,  and  which  made  the  English  Reformation,  when 
not  interfered  with  by  the  secular  power,  contrast 
so  favourably  with  the  religious  movements  on  the 
Continent.  Foremost  among  these  men  was  Colet,  Dean 
of  St.  Paul's,  whose  readings  on  the  Greek  Testament 
attracted  numerous  audiences  at  Oxford  and  at  his 
own  cathedral,  and  whose  denunciation  of  such  abuses  a.d.  1512. 
as  simony,  nepotism,  non-rei^ident  clergy,  and  secu- 
larized bishops   caused   considerable   sensation.     Like 


148  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

CHAP,  minded  was  Colet's  friend  Grocyn,  who  had  revived  the 
— .-L^  study  of  Greek  at  Oxford  and  himself  given  instruction 
to  Erasmus.  His  pupil's  great  publication,  a  printed 
A.D.  1516.  Greek  Testament  with  a  commentary,  paved  the  way 
for  a  scientific  review  of  the  doctrinal  tenets  of  the 
Church.  Included  in  this  Oxford  coterie  (in  the  years 
1492-1496)  was  Thomas  More,  equally  zealous  for 
reform  by  means  of  education,  and  as  late  as  1516  pre- 
pared to  advocate,  or  at  least  able  to  conceive  of,  a  tolera- 
tion to  all  religious  creeds.  That  such  toleration  was 
utterly  impracticable  in  the  sixteenth  century  is  shown 
by  the  conduct  of  the  author  of  "  Utopia  "  when  he 
afterwards  had  to  deal  with  heresy  as  a  statesman. 
Warham,  the  primate,  a  prelate  whose  abilities  the 
genius  of  the  northern  archbishop  has  somewhat 
eclipsed,  was  no  less  desirous  of  reform.  His  friend 
Erasmus  writes  to  him,  detailing  the  most  conspicuous 
abuses  in  the  Church's  system,  and  Warham  ^  corre- 
sponds with  Wolsey  on  the  evils  connected  with 
monastic  appropriations.  Fox,  Bishop  of  Winchester, 
was  in  communication  with  Wolsey  on  the  same 
subject  in  1518.  Convinced  of  the  necessity  of  basing 
reformation  on  theological  research,  this  prelate  had 
endowed  the  College  of  Corpus  Christi,  Oxford,  for  the 
study  of  the  three  sacred  languages,  Latin,  Greek,  and 
Hebrew.  The  pious  Fisher,  Bishop  of  Eochester,  was 
instrumental  in  introducing  the  new  studies  at  Cam- 
bridge, and  it  was  at  his  instigation  that  Lady 
Margaret's  endowments  at  both  universities  were  be- 
stowed.  Public  lectures  on  the  Greek  Testament  were 
being  given  at  Cambridge  by  Dr.  Warner  and  Mr. 
Stafford.  Such  influences  were  radiated  from  the 
universities  to  all  jDarts  of  England,  and  everywhere 

i  See  Ellis,  Orig.  Letters,  III.  ii.  30, 


i 


HENRY   VIII.  149 

men's  minds  were  roused  to  consider  the  necessity  of  chap. 
a  religious  reform.  But  the  educational  reformers  ^-.^J-- 
seldom  ventured  to  impugn  those  papal  pretensions 
which  the  modern  historian  regards  as  the  fountain 
head  of  all  mediaeval  abuses.  The  king  himself,  indeed, 
had  recently  silenced  all  controversy  on  this  topic  by 
his  strong  assertion  of  papal  supremacy  in  his  treatise  ^ 
against  Luther,  the  treatise  which  obtained  for  the 
English  sovereign  the  title  "  Defender  of  the  Faith." 
And  the  fanaticism  and  irreverence  of  the  refugee 
Protestants  had  done  little  to  attract  English  sympathies 
to  the  cause  of  anti-papal  systems.  The  irony  of  fate 
now  ruled  that  the  stoutest  champion  of  the  Papacy 
should  sever  England  from  the  Eoman  communion, 
and  that  the  repulsive  episode  which  terminated  his 
first  marriage  should  inaugurate  a  purification  of  the 
national  Church. 

Henry  appears  to  have  professed  no  doubts  as  to  the  The  divorce 
validity  of  his  marriage  with  Catharine  and  the  legiti- 
macy of  the  Princess  Mary  before  1526.  By  this  time 
the  queen,  who  was  much  his  senior,  had  lost  her 
beauty.  Of  her  children  only  one  had  survived,  and 
that  a  female,  whose  claim  to  the  succession  would  be 
an  anomaly,  and  whose  legitimacy  might  certainly 
be  questioned  by  the  men  who  disallowed  papal  dis- 
pensations. In  this  same  year  Henry's  affections  were 
undoubtedly  attracted  by  Anne  Boleyn,  a  lady  of  the 
queen's  retinue.  It  will  be  unnecessary  here  to  ask 
which  of  these  considerations  first  suggested  to  the  king 
the  idea  of  a  divorce.  It  will  be  sufficient  to  remark 
that  Henry's  conduct  throughout  the  proceedings 
was  disgustingly  brutal,  on  the  most  favourable 
assumption. 

1  Assertio  Septem  Sacramentorum,  printed  in  1521. 


ISO 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


CHAP.  Tlie  "  king's  matter  "  agitated  Europe  for  about  five 
_Iiil_  years,  and  involved  a  series  of  political  complications 
and  discreditable  intrigues.  These  also  we  cannot  in- 
vestigate fully  in  such  a  work  as  this.  We  content 
ourselves  with  indicating  what  appear  to  be  the  pro- 
minent features  in  the  episode,  and  treating  it  in  its 
relation  to  ecclesiastical  history.  The  ground  on  which 
Henry  claimed  a  divorce  was  that  a  marriage  with  a 
brother's  widow  was  prohibited  by  God's  law,  and  could 
not  be  legalized  by  any  papal  dispensation.  Still  more 
irregular  was  such  a  marriage  if  the  j)revious  union 
had  been  consummated,  as  Henry  argued  that  of 
Catharine  and  Prince  Arthur  had  been.  It  seems  that 
Wolsey's  services  were  enlisted  on  the  side  of  the  king 
before  the  end  of  1526,  and  that  in  May,  1527,  he 
thought  to  settle  the  question  offhand  by  pronouncing 
the  divorce  himself  in  his  capacity  as  jDapal  legate. 
This  proceeding  was  forbidden  by  Pope  Clement  VIL, 
who  was  a  prisoner  in  the  hands  of  the  Emperor 
Charles,  Catharine's  nephew.  Counsel  was  now  taken 
with  several  bishops,  theologians,  and  doctors  of  law, 
but  rather  with  the  view  of  vindicating  the  king,  and 
propping  an  unpopular  cause  with  respectable  names, 
than  of  obtaining  a  final  verdict.  Thus  early  ^  a  course 
had  been  suggested  which  was  adopted  at  Cranmer's 
recommendation  two  years  later,  viz.  that  the  question 
at  issue  should  be  submitted  for  decision  to  the  uni- 
versities. Wolsey,  against  whom  Anne  Boleyn  had 
conceived  a  violent  prejudice,  knew  that  his  only  hope 
of  retaining  court  favour  lay  in  a  zealous  advocacy  of 
Result  of     Henry's   interests   at   Eome.      Twice  his  negotiations 

negotia-  '^  , 

tions  with    Were  foiled,  when  seemingly  on  the  verge  of  success,  by 
the  artifices  of  the  shifty  Pope,  who  dared  not  ofiend 

1  See  J.  H.  Blunt,  The  Reformation,  pp.  129,  130. 


VII. 


HENRY   VIII.  151 

the  Emperor  Charles.  In  1528  a  third  attempt  was  chap. 
made.  Dr.  Fox  and  Dr.  Gardiner  were  sent  to  bring 
from  Clement  a  commission  empowering  Wolsey  and 
Campeggio  (a  cardinal  vv^ho  was  known  to  the  king, 
and  who  held  the  English  bishopric  of  Salisbury)  to  act 
as  his  representatives,  and  give  a  final  judgment  on  the 
question  in  a  legatine  court.  After  great  difficulties 
had  been  surmounted,  this  court  was  formally  sanc- 
tioned ;  and  before  it  Henry  and  Catharine  were  cited 
in  the  hall  of  Blackfriars  Palace  (May  31,  1529).  The 
injured  queen,  arguing  her  cause  in  person,  thought 
it  best  to  repudiate  the  authority  of  the  court,  and 
make  a  formal  appeal  to  the  Pope  himself.  The  legates 
pronounced  her  contumacious,  and  continued  the 
sessions.  On  June  28  Catharine's  cause  was  defended 
by  Bishop  Fisher,  who  argued  the  validity  of  the 
marriage  with  an  earnestness  which  was  never  forgiven 
by  Henry.  Fisher  stood  almost  alone  in  his  opposition 
to  the  king's  project :  More  was  tongue-tied  by  his  hopes 
of  office  ;  other  leading  men  had  been  persuaded  or 
silenced  by  Henry's  machinations.  Suddenly  it  came 
out  that  Campeggio  had  been  privately  instructed  by 
Clement  not  to  decide  the  question  in  England.  On 
July  23  he  adjourned  the  court,  and  it  was  understood 
that  Henry  was  to  be  cited  to  Eome,  and  a  new  trial 
instituted.  The  proceedings  in  the  legatine  court  had 
only  been  sanctioned  to  gain  time.  The  anger  of  the 
disappointed  monarch  was  excusable.  We  have  told 
how  it  was  wreaked  upon  Wolsey,  who  had  really  been 
duped  as  completely  as  the  king  himself.  The  cardinal 
was  deprived  of  the  Great  Seal  this  autumn,  the  new 
Chancellor  being  Sir  Thomas  More.  This  autumn  also 
saw  the  initiation  in  Parliament  of  measures  inimical 
to  the  Pope  and  the  ecclesiastics  (who  were  supposed 


152  ECCLESIA  ANGLICANA. 

CHAP,  to  be  partisans  of  Wolsey) — measures  which  quickly 
^^}-  brought  England  to  the  first  landmark  in  the  Eeforma- 
tion  period,  the  formal  repudiation  of  all  pajoal  pre- 
tensions. The  progress  of  these  measures  will  be 
considered  below.  Confining  ourselves  to  the  matter 
of  the  divorce,  we  notice  the  appearance  of  an  adviser 
hitherto  unknown,  but  destined  to  play  as  important 
a  part  in  English  history  as  Wolsey  himself.  Gardiner 
and  Fox  were  accompanying  the  king  on  a  progress, 
Oct.  1529.  when  they  chanced  to  meet  with  Dr.  Cranmer,  fellow  ^ 
of  Jesus  College,  Cambridge,  at  Waltham,  and  converse 
with  him  on  the  great  question  of  the  day.  Dr. 
Cranmer,  although  little  known  in  Cambridge,^  and 
certainly  not  ranking  high  among  men  of  learning, 
possessed  a  considerable  knowledge  of  law  and  some 
natural  acumen.  Like  the  rest  of  the  world,  he  had 
followed  the  progress  of  the  "  king's  matter "  with 
interest.  In  his  conversation  with  Gardiner  and  Fox 
he  suggested  that  the  opinions  of  the  universities  should 
be  taken,  and  the  matter  then  be  decided  in  an  English 
The  appeal  court.  This  counsel  was  reported  to  the  king.  It  at 
univer-  oucc  took  his  fancy;  for  the  universities  and  courts 
A^D  ^1530  ^^ England  could  probably  be  coerced  to  give  a  favourable 
decision.  Cranmer  was  ordered  to  write  a  book  ex- 
pressing his  views,  and  was  afterwards  sent  to  Rome, 
probably  to  broach  the  new  expedient  to  the  Pope. 
Thence  he  journeyed  to  the  various  Italian  universities, 
to  secure  verdicts  on  Henry's  behalf.  The  king's  appli- 
cation- to  the  universities  was  accompanied  with  bribes ; 

1  Cranmer's  marriage  with  his  first  wife  had  not  lost  him  his  fellowship.  She 
died  within  the  twelvemonth,  and  he  claimed  a  right  to  be  reinstated, 

^  "  For  a  quarter  of  a  century  he  was  resident  in  Cambridge — twenty- five  years 
of  excitement,  of  reform,  and  of  progress  :  and  yet  we  can  only  remai'k  and  lament 
that  among  the  distinguished  men  of  the  university  the  name  of  Cranmer  does  not 
appear." — Hook's  Archbishops. 


HENRY   VIII.  153 

and  Orleans,  Paris,  Angiers,  Bourges,  Toulouse,  Padua,  chap. 
and  Bologna  pronounced  that  Henry's  marriage  was  ^Ii!l_ 
against  God's  law,  and  that  the  Pope  had  no  power 
to  sanction  it  by  dispensation.  But  the  English  uni- 
versities were  less  amenable  to  persuasion  than  had  been 
expected.  Cambridge  yielded  to  menaces,  but  only 
acknowledged  the  illegality  of  such  a  man  iage  "  when 
the  matrimony  had  actually  been  consummated."  ^ 
Oxford,  still  grateful  to  her  benefactor  Wolsey,  made 
a  much  bolder  stand.  In  fact,  the  desired  response 
could  only  be  secured  by  manipulating  Convocation. 
The  king's  party  were  summoned  to  vote  without  the 
knowledge  of  the  opposition.  And  even  then  the  ille- 
gality of  Henry's  marriage  was  voted  in  the  same 
terms  as  at  Cambridge.  A  servile  Parliament  was  now 
incited  to  demand  from  the  Pope  a  declaration  that  the 
marriage  was  null,  on  the  ground  that  the  universities 
had  so  decided,  and  to  reproach  him  for  his  delay  in 
the  matter  (July,  1530).  The  Pope  replied  rebuking 
the  Parliament  for  its  audacity.  This  reply  elicited  a 
royal  proclamation  which  make  it  penal  to  introduce 
bulls  from  Eome  (Sept.  19,  1530).  The  Houses  of 
Convocation  were  intimidated  by  a  preposterous  threat 
of  prosecution  for  having  acknowledged  Wolsey's 
legatine  authority.  They  appear  to  have  voted  the 
nullity  of  Henry's  marriage  in  terms  less  equivocal 
than  those  adopted  by  the  universities.  The  death 
of  Warham  (Aug.  1532)  enabled  Henry  to  put  the 
finishing  stroke  to  the  business.  Passing  over  Gardiner  cranmer 
and  other  deserving  ecclesiastics,  Henry  conferred  the  primate, 
primacy  on  the  new  Cambridge   luminary.     Thomas 

1  "  Respondemus  .  ,  .  quod  ducere  uxorem  fratris  mortui  sine  liberis,  cognitam 
a  priori  viro  per  carnalem  copulam,  nobis  Christianis  hodie  est  prohibitum  jure 
divino  ac  naturall." — Lamb's  Corpus  Christi  Documents,  p.  21. 


154  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

CHAP.  Cranmer  was  nominated  by  the  Crown,  and  dutifully 
_ZJI:_    elected   by  the   monks   of  Canterbury.      He  took  the 

Marchi533.  nocessary  oath  of  obedience  to  Rome  (presumably  with 
a  secret  reservation),  and  thus  obtained  the  bull  of 
consecration  and  pallium,  which  were  still  considered 
essentials. 

Andde-  Convinced   that   the   new   primate   would    have   no 

question,  scruple  about  pronouncing  the  divorce,  Henry  antici- 
pated this  formality  by  privately  marrying  Anne 
Boleyn  at  the  end  of  1532.  Cranmer  made  a  parade 
of  a  second  appeal  to  Convocation,  and  of  a  petition  to 
Henry,  asking  leave  to  "  proceed  to  the  final  determina- 
tion" of  his  cause.  The  king  was  pleased  to  grant 
the  request  of  his  "  most  humble  orator  and  bedeman." 
Cranmer  held  a  court  at  Dunstable,  pronounced  the 
queen  to  be  contumax  for  refusing  to  appear,  and  gave 
sentence  that  it  was  not  within  the  power  of  a  Pope 
to  license  a  marriage  with  a  brother's  widow  (May  23). 
A  week  later  he  pronounced  at  Lambeth  the  validity 
of  Henry's  private  marriage  with  Anne  Boleyn.  The 
new  queen  was  crowned  on  June  1,  and  on  September  5 
gave  birth  to  the  Princess  Elizabeth.  The  Pope  had 
meantime  annulled  Cranmei-'s  sentence,  and  threatened 
the  king  with  excommunication.  On  March  23,  1534, 
the  long-delayed  papal  verdict  found  utterance.  Clement 
declared  that  the  marriage  with  Catharine  was  valid, 
and  that  Henry  could  have  no  other  wife  while  she 
lived. 

Anti-papal  We  must  now  turn  our  attention  to  the  ecclesiastical 
legislation  of  the  celebrated  "  Reformation  Parliament " 
(1529-1536).  Wolsey's  downfall  had  been  hailed  with 
joy  by  both  Houses.  There  was  much  ill  feeling  at 
this  time  between  clergy  and  laity,  and  as  the  whole 
body  of  ecclesiastics  was  supposed  to  be  implicated  in 


HENRY   VII I.  155 

the  disgrace  of  the  favourite,  the  winter  of  1529  was 
thought  a  fit  season  for  introducing  measures  to  their 
detriment.  Three  bills  of  such  tendency  were  passed. 
The  fees  charged  in  the  bishops'  courts  for  probate  of 
wills  were  cut  down  by  the  first ;  mortuary  fees  by  the 
second ;  the  third  forbade  clerics  to  obtain  from  the 
Pope  licences  to  hold  a  plurality  of  benefices.     This  bill  I'apai 

.....  licences 

in  no  way  prohibited  pluralities;  it  merely  made  theandbims 

•TTf»i'--p  if»  prohibited. 

king  the  lountam-head  of  the  iniquity  for  the  future,  a.d.  1529. 
instead  of  the  Pope.  The  same  tendency  is  observable 
in  many  other  reformatory  measures  of  this  Parliament, 
which,  it  will  be  borne  in  mind,  was  well  stocked  with 
holders  of  offices  under  the  Crown.  We  have  already 
mentioned  the  proclamation  of  Sept.  19,  1530,  which 
forbade  the  introduction  of  Eoman  bulls.  It  may  appear 
somewhat  inconsistent  that  Cranmer,  two  years  after- 
wards, applied  to  the  Pope  for  a  bull  to  sanction  his 
consecration.  But  it  was  important  that  no  one  should 
be  able  to  dispute  the  title  of  the  metropolitan  whose 
business  it  was  to  pronounce  the  divorce ;  and  even  at 
this  date  the  rupture  with  Rome  was  not  considered 
final. 

Other  and  more  important  measures,  however,  were  The  king's 
preparing  men  for  a  final  severance  from  Rome  during  siasticai 
the  years  1530-1534.     The  most  remarkable  of  these  ^''p''^"'^''''- 
was  the  Act  which  vested  the  supremacy  of  the  English 
Church   in  the  sovereign.      We  have  already  related 
that  the  clergy  were  punished  for  accepting  Wolsey's 
legatine  authority,  it  being  argued  that  they  were  thus 
accessory  to  his  supposed  misdemeanours.    Judges  were 
found  who  ruled  that  for  this  ofience  the  whole  body 
of  the  clergy  were  liable  to  the  penalties  of  the  "Prae- 
munire" statute;    in  other  words,  that  their  liberties 
and  possessions  were  entirely  at  the  mercy  of  the  king. 


156  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

CHAP.  To  purcliase  the  royal  pardon  tlie  Houses  of  Convocation 
-HiL^  paid  an  enormous  sum  of  money.  They  were  told  that 
in  the  preamble  to  the  Act  granting  this  payment  a 
form  must  be  introduced  asserting  that  the  sovereign 
was  supreme  head  of  the  English  Church.  The  words 
suggested  by  Henry  were,  "  the  English  Church,  of 
which  the  king  alone  is  protector  and  supreme  head." 
This  wording  appeared  to  the  clergy  objectionably 
vague,  if  not  irreverent.  It  certainly  might  be  con- 
strued as  giving  the  sovereign  the  powers  hitherto 
vested  in  the  pontiff,  and  though  most  of  the  clergy 
were  inclined  to  renounce  Roman  supremacy,  none 
wished  for  a  Pope  at  home  in  the  person  of  Henry  YIII. 
To  allay  their  fears,  Henry  disclaimed  all  pretence  to 
interfere  with  the  spiritual  functions  of  the  clergy,  or 
disparage  the  Apostolical  succession.  He  only  insisted 
that  tiie  head  of  a  Christian  state  must  be  the  head  of 
its  Church  also.  As  the  view  was  expressed  afterwards 
by  its  champion  Gardiner,  Henry  claimed  to  be  "  a 
prince  of  his  whole  people,  not  of  a  part  of  it,"  and  to 
"  govern  them  in  all  things,  not  in  some  only  ;  and  as 
the  people  constitute  the  Church  of  England,  so  he 
must  needs  be  the  supreme  head  of  the  Church,  as  he  is 
the  supreme  head  of  the  people."  ^  Cranmer  did  his 
best  to  expound  this  view  to  Convocation.  Still  the 
members,  especially  those  of  the  Lower  House,  were  dis- 
satisfied. They  insisted  on  a  qualifying  clause,  "  quan- 
tum 'per  Christi  legem  licet  etiam  supremum  caput,"  ^  and 
Henry  had  to  be  content  with  this  modification  of  the 
title.  To  the  "  Reformation  Parliament,"  however,  the 
maintenance  of  the  liberties  of  the  Church  was  a  matter 

^  Gardiner,  De  vera  obedientia. 

f,  "  Ecclesije  et  cleri  Anglicani,  cujus  singularem  protectorem,  imicum  ct 
supremum  dominum,  et  quantum  per  Christi  legem  licet  etiam  supremum  caput 
ipsius  majestatem  recognoscimus." — Wilkins,  Cone,  iii.  725. 


Feb.  1531. 


HENRY   VIII.  157 

of  small  importance.  When  the  claim  to  supremacy  was  chap. 
embodied  in  an  Act  of  Parliament  in  1534,  the  qualify-  — .-1— 
ing  clause  was  omitted.  The  "  Act  of  Supremacy  "  was 
succeeded  by  an  Act  yet  more  disgraceful  to  the  national 
representatives.  This  made  non-recognition  of  the  Nov.  1534. 
new  title  punishable  with  death.  It  declared  it  to  be 
treason  "  to  imagine,  invent,  practise,  or  attempt  any 
bodily  harm  "  against  any  of  the  royal  family,  or  "to 
deprive  any  of  them  of  their  dignity,  title,  or  name." 
The  "  Treason  Act,"  as  it  is  called,  was  apparently 
devised  by  Henry  to  bring  to  the  scaffold  More  and  Fisher, 
of  whose  fate  we  shall  speak  presently.  It  was  repealed 
by  1  Edw.  VI.  c.  12.  The  "  Act  of  Supremacy  "  was  re- 
pealed in  the  first  year  of  Mary,  and  never  resuscitated. 
Under  Elizabeth,  who  would  not  accept  a  more  pre- 
tentious title  than  "  Supreme  Governor  of  the  Church," 
an  Act  was  passed  which  centred  in  the  Crown  all 
corrective  jurisdiction  for  the  punishment  of  "  errors, 
heresies,  schisms,  abuses,  etc."  Such  jurisdiction  had 
really  always  been  a  constitutional  prerogative  of  the 
Crown,  though  in  recent  times  it  had  been  invaded  by 
papal  pretensions.  But  Henry  claimed,  and  by  the 
servility  of  Parliament  was  enabled  to  exercise,  a 
directive  jurisdiction,  or  power  to  give  orders  to  the 
clergy  in  matters  of  doctrine,  discipline,  and  practice. 
And  the  same  claim  was  made  by  those  who  represented 
the  Crown  in  the  reign  of  Edward  VI.  The  mismanage- 
ment of  the  Church  in  which  this  claim  at  last  resulted 
so  disgusted  England,  that  on  Edward's  death  it  was 
prepared  to  put  Eoman  supremacy  again  on  its  trial 
rather  than  tolerate  a  continuance  of  the  lay  papacy. 
AVith  regard  to  the  fine  demanded  of  the  clergy,  it  is  to 
be  noticed  that  the  payment  made  by  the  Canterbury 
Convocation  alone  amounted  to  a  million  and  a  half  of 


158 


ECCLESIA  ANGLICANA, 


CHAP. 
VII. 


modern  monej''.     The  representatives  of  the  laity  were, 

of   course,    equally   liable    to    a   prcemunire,    since    all 

England  had  recognized   Wolsey's  legatine  authority. 

But   it   was   only   the   clergy  whom  Henry   dared  to 

despoil.     From  the  Commons  he  received  a  grovelling 

apology  for  their  fictitious  offence,  and  with  this  he 

professed  himself  satisfied.^ 

The  Com-         The  next  reformatory  measure  came  from  the  Com- 
mons '^ 
extort  the    mous,  who,  on  March  18,  1532,  petitioned  the  king  for 

"submiS-  T-      n      r  T  T'l  •  ^  •     ^^ 

sionofthe  reiiei  irom  divers  clerical  exactions,  and  especially 
c  ergy.  complained  of  being  subject  to  canons  which  had  never 
received  assent  of  Parliament.  The  king  was  thus 
induced  to  send  to  the  Houses  of  Convocation  three 
Articles  for  signature,  viz.  (1)  No  constitution  or 
ordinance  shall  be  hereafter  enacted  by  the  clergy 
without  the  king's  consent ;  (2)  The  canons  are  to  be 
reviewed  by  a  committee  of  thirty  persons,  who  shall 
abrogate  therein  whatever  "  is  prejudicial  to  the  king's 
prerogative  and  onerous  to  his  Highness's  subjects ;  " 
(3)  All  such  canons  as  the  committee  approve  of  shall 
be  binding  when  ratified  by  the  king.  The  third  of 
these  Articles  was  rejected  by  Convocation,  acting  under 
the  influence  of  Bishop  Fisher.  Their  acceptance  of 
May,  1532.  the  othcr  two  was  embodied  in  a  subsequent  Act  of 
Parliament  (January,  1534),  called  the  "Statute  of  the 
Submission  of  the  Clergy."  This  enacted  that  sixteen 
men  of  both  Houses  of  Parliament  and  sixteen  of  the 
clergy  should  be  named  by  the  king  to  review  the 
canons.  It  also  ordered  that  henceforth  all  convoca- 
tions should  be  called  by  the  king's  writ  ^  (instead  of 
by  the  writ  of  the  archbishop),  and  that  nothing  should 
be  done  therein  without  the  king's  licence. 

1  See  Amos,  Statutes  of  Henry  VIII.,  p.  57. 

2  By  an  iinconstitutional  refusal  of  this  writ  the  anti-Church  administratioa  of 
George  I.  was  able  to  suppress  the  Church's  representative  body. 


HENRY   VIII.  159 

We  next  notice  the  statute  prohibiting  the  payment      chap. 
of  annates   to   Eome.      This  measure  originated  in  a       ^^}'  . 
petition   of  Convocation   in    1531.       This   petition   is  Annates, 
remarkable  as  proving  that  the  idea  of  separation  from  hibited°at 
Eome  was  not  unacceptable  to  the  clergy ;  indeed,  that  i^J-ance  of 
the  first    suggestion    of  separation    came  from   them.  J°^^°'^^" 
How  impoverishing  the  impost  of  annates  was  to  the 
Church  may  be  gathered  from  the  fact  that  a  newly 
appointed  bishop  was  not  only  charged  with  fees  for 
papal  bulls  before  he  could  be  consecrated,  but  also  had 
to  pay  in  advance  the  whole  of  his  first  year's  income. 
Convocation  prayed  the  King  that  this  impost  should 
be  abolished,  and  that  if  the  Pope  oifered  opposition, 
"  forasmuch  as  S.  Paul  willeth  us  to  withdraw  ourselves 
from  all  such  as  walk  inordinately,  it  may  please  the 
king's  most  noble  majesty   to  ordain   in   the   present 
Parliament  that  then  ilie  obedience  of  Mm  and  his  people 
he  loitlidrawn  from  the  see  of  Horned     This  petition  was 
immediately  followed  by  an  Act  of  Parliament  ^  ordering 
that  payment  of  annates   should   cease,  and  that  the 
Pope  should  only  receive  a  payment  of  five  per  cent,  on 
the  income  of  the  see,  as  an  acknowledgment  for  the 
requisite   bulls ;    and   if  the    Pope   should   resist   this 
measure  and  refuse  bulls  for  consecration,  then  it  should 
"  be  lawful  for  the   bishops  to  be  consecrated  without 
them,   and  for   the   clergy  to   minister  all  manner  of 
sacraments   and    sacramentals,    any    excommunication, 
interdiction,  or  inhibition  of  the  Pope  notwithstanding." 

Here  again,  however,  we  meet  with  a  testimony  that 
these  reformatory  measures  were  all  subsidiary  to  the 
divorce  business.  This  statute  was  not  to  be  ratified 
by  the  king  till  Easter,  1533.  It  was  doubtless  levelled 
in  terrorem,  as  a  method  of  coerciug  the  Pope  to  pro- 
nounce the  desired  sentence. 

1  23  Hen.  VIII.  c.  20. 


i6o 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


Negotia- 
tions with 
the  Pope 
resumed 
to  no 
purpose. 


Still  more  apparent  was  Henry's  motive  when  the 
Parliament  was  inspired  to  pass  the  "  Statute  for  the 
Eestraint  of  Appeals  "  (Feb.  1533).  In  this  statute  it 
is  alleged  that  England  is  composed  of  a  temporality  and 
a  spirituality,  each  competent  to  judge  its  own  causes. 
Yet,  despite  the  prohibitions  of  former  kings,  appeals 
have  been  made  to  the  see  of  Rome  in  causes  of  matrimony 
and  others,  which  have  delayed  and  defeated  justice. 
For  the  future  all  such  causes  are  to  be  decided  within 
the  kingdom  and  in  the  several  courts  to  which  they 
belong.^  -^i^y  spiritual  per.son  who  shall  refuse  to 
execute  the  sentence  of  these  courts  shall  be  imprisoned 
or  fined.  Those  who  introduce  censures  from  Eome 
shall  be  liable  to  the  penalties  already  provided  by  the 
statute  16  Rich.  II.  Appeals  are  to  be  made  from 
the  archdeacon  to  the  bishop,  or  from  him  to  the  arch- 
bishop or  Dean  of  Arches.  Here  the  right  of  appeal 
shall  end,  save  in  the  case  of  the  king  and  his  heirs,  who 
may  appeal  from  the  archbishop  to  the  Upper  House  of 
Convocation.  Thus  was  new  machinery  provided  for 
effecting  the  divorce,  in  case  the  Pope  should  continue 
obdurate.  It  was  by  virtue  of  this  statute  that  Cranmer 
actually  took  upon  himself  to  give  judgment  in  this 
matter  in  the  following  May. 

All  these  reformatory  measures  were  wellnigh  can- 
celled in  the  winter  of  this  year.  Francis,  King  of 
France,  mediated  between  Henry  and  the  Pope.  An 
arrangement  was  pending  that  the  former  should  give 
up  all  measures  for  a  severance  from  Rome,  and  the  Pope 

'  Spiritual  causes,  it  -will  be  seen,  are  strictly  confined  to  the  spirituality 
"which,"  says  the  preamble,  "  always  hath  been  reported  and  also  found  of  that 
sort,  that  both  for  knowledge,  integrity,  and  sufficiency  of  number  it  hath  been 
always  thought  and  is  at  this  hour  sufficient  and  meet  of  itself,  without  the  inter- 
meddling of  any  exterior  person  or  persons,  to  declare  and  determine  all  such 
doubts."  We  need  not  point  out  how  utterly  opposed  to  this  principle  is  the 
practice  of  the  present  times. 


HENRY   VII I.  i6i 

should  allow  tlie  divorce  case  to  be  reconsidered  by  chap. 
impartial  judges  at  Cambrai.  Henry's  assent  was  to  ^"- 
reach  the  Pope  by  a  certain  day.  The  English  courier 
was  despatched  with  the  concession  required,  but  failed 
to  arrive  in  time.-^  Pressed  by  the  Emperor  Charles, 
and  ignorant  of  Henry's  acquiescence,  the  Pope  took 
the  fatal  step  by  passing  that  sentence  of  March  23 
of  which  we  have  made  mention.  The  rupture  was 
completed  in  the  following  year,  when  a  new  Pope, 
Paul  III.,  was  roused  by  the  unjust  executions  of  More 
and  Eisher  to  pronounce  sentences  of  excommunication 
and  deposition  against  Henry  VIII.,  and  to  absolve 
all  his  subjects  from  their  allegiance.  Against  such 
hostility,  however,  England  was  forearmed  by  the 
statutes  we  have  enumerated. 

But  a  few  more  measures  were  necessary  to  re-  papai 
establish  the  independence  of  the  English  Church.  JJrence  in 
One  of  them  was  an  Act  prohibiting  papal  inter-  proMbited 
ference  in  appointments  to  bishoprics.  The  "  Statute 
of  Provisors  "  and  other  Acts  of  recent  reigns  had  in- 
validated the  papal  claim  to  nominate  to  English 
bishoprics ;  and  of  late  years  the  usual  method  of  filling 
up  a  vacant  see  had  been  that  which  obtains  now.  A 
conge  d'elire  was  given  to  the  diocesan  chapter,  but  was 
really  made  a  legal  fiction  by  the  sovereign's  preroga- 
tive of  nomination.  But  even  down  to  the  date  of 
Cranmer's  consecration  papal  bulls  were  thought  neces- 
sary to  give  final  confirmation,  and  the  Pope  thus  had 
it  in  his  power  to  invalidate  the  sovereign's  appoint- 
ment. This  power  was  taken  away  by  an  Act  of  1533, 
which  required  that  no  person  shall  "  henceforth  be 
presented  to  the  Bishop  of  Rome,  nor  apply  for  bulls 
from  him,"  and  that  the  archbishop  and  bishops  shall 

•  See  Hubert's  Henry  VIII. ;  Kennctt,  ii.  pp.  170-173. 

M 


i62  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

CHAP,     at  once  consecrate  the  nominee  of  the  king  and  chapter, 
"  giving  and  using  to  him  pall,  and  all  other  benedic- 


VII. 


"  1 


Thesepara-  tions,  witliout  applying  for  them  to  the  see  of  Eome 
accom-  The  supremacy  had  as  yet  only  heen  sanctioned  by 
ciergyac^^  Convocation ;  now,  expressed  in  unequivocal  terms,  it 
quiescmg.  ^^g  embodied  in  an  Act  of  Parliament.  Before  this 
was  done  the  Convocations  and  universities,  and  even 
the  regular  clergy,  had  spontaneously  repudiated  the 
Pope's  pretensions  to  authority  in  our  Church,  declaring 
that  the  Bishop  of  Eome  had  "  no  greater  jurisdiction  " 
in  this  kingdom  "  than  any  other  foreign  bishop "  ^ 
(spring  and  summer,  1534).  By  virtue  of  his  new 
title  Henry  had  charged  the  prelates  to  see  that  the 
name  of  the  Bishop  of  Eome  was  struck  out  of  all 
manner  of  "oraisons,  rubricks,  canons  of  mass  books, 
etc."  The  mandate  was  cheerfully  complied  with,  and 
the  bishops  were  for  the  most  part  zealous  in  urging 
the  clergy  to  preach  about  the  supremacy  of  the  sove- 
reign and  "  his  just  cause  of  matrimon}^"  Thus  was 
the  first  stage  in  the  Eeformation  reached,  and  a  con- 
stitutional change  established  which  made  the  English 
Church  independent  of  Eome. 

"  This  statute  was  supplemented  by  26  Hen.  VIII.  c.  14,  "  For  the  Nomina- 
tion of  Suffragans  and  Consecration  of  them."  Twenty-six  towns  are  herein  men- 
tioned as  to  be  accounted  suffragan  sees,  and  the  regulations  for  the  appointment 
of  their  bishops  are  laid  down.  This  Act  is  still  in  force.  It  is  highly  discreditable 
to  our  episcopate  that  until  quite  recently  there  was  little  thought  of  using  what  in 
thinly  populated  mediaeval  England  was  always  a  recognized  part  of  the  Church's 
machinery. 

^  See  Wilkins,  Cone,  lii.  769,  782,  783;  and  Rymer,  xiv.  493.  How  general  this 
repudiation  was  is  shown  by  Wharton's  statement,  that  in  his  time  there  were  in 
the  Exchequer  at  least  175  instruments  disowning  papal  jurisdiction.  These  con- 
tained the  subscriptions  of  all  the  bishops,  chapters,  monasteries,  colleges,  hospitals, 
etc.,  of  thirteen  dioceses,  and  he  knew  where  the  subscriptions  of  the  remaining 
dioceses  were  to  be  found :  see  Mr.  J.  H.  Blunt,  The  Reformation,  p.  275. 


HENRY  VI  11.  163 


CHAPTER  VIII. 

i^cnrg  imi, — continued. 
A.D.  1534-1547. 

Two  distinguished  malcontents — Implicated  by  Elizabeth  Barton — And  disposed  of 
under  the  "Treason  Act"— Careers  of  More — And  Bishop  Fisher— Cromwell  in 
the  ascendant  (1530-1540) — His  history — His  scheme  for  spoiling  the  monasteries 
— Possible  arguments  in  its  defence — Precedents — Detailed  account  of  the  scheme 
— Its  execution — Suppression  of  the  smaller  houses — Second  visitation — Enforced 
resignation  of  the  larger  houses — The  "  Pilgrimage  of  Grace  " — Third  and  final 
visitation — Fate  of  the  ejected — Ex  post  facto  Act  of  1539 — Vandalism — How 
the  spoil  was  spent — Effect  on  the  House  of  Lords  and  the  cathedrals — The  loot 
at  Canterbury— Henry  excommunicated — Progress  of  Reformation — State  of 
parties — The  foreign  Protestants  and  Henry — The  Ten  Arlicles  passed — Progress 
of  Reforming  measures — Royal  injunctions — Proceedings  in  Convocation — The 
"  Bishops'  Book  " — More  royal  injunctions — The  open  Bible — Foreign  Protestants 
again  at  Henry — The  King  no  Protestant — Religious  persecutions— A  retrospect 
— Hunn  and  turbulent  Protestantism  in  1515 — Why  ultra-Protestants  were 
tolerated  from  1534-1539— But  persecuted  from  1529-1534 — Instances— The  sop 
to  the  Protestant  faction — Romanists  are  the  onlysufiferers  from  1534  to  November, 
1538— The  Six  Articles  of  1539— This  Act  not  often  enforced— Fall  of  Cromwell— 
Henceforward  both  extremes  suffer — But  an  orderly  Reformation  is  continued — 
The  "  King's  Book  " — Purgation  of  devotional  offices— English  Litany  and  King's 
Primer — The  "  Book  of  Homilies." 

To  most  persons,  whether  lay  or  clerical,  the  religions  two  dis- 
changes  w^ere  satisftictory.     Two  important  exceptions  maicon- 
mnst  be  noticed.     Sir  Thomas  More  and  Bishop  Fisher  ^®^*®' 
were  known  to  sympathize  with  the  partisans  of  Queen 
Catharine ;  they  were  also  averse  to  the  royal  supre- 
macy.    For  the   former  cause  they  had   been  marked 
out  for  destruction  by  the  king ;  their  scruples  about 
forswearing   their   allegiance   to   the  Pope  were   now 
made  a   means   to   ensnare  them.     Already  they  had 


i64  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

CHAP,     been  imperilled  by  alleged  implication  in  tlie  affair  of 


VIII. 


Elizabeth  Barton,  the  nun  of  Kent.  This  unfortunate 
person  had  had  her  mind  upset,  it  seems,  by  the  subject 
of  the  queen's  wrongs — a  cause  which  had  many  ad- 
herents among  the  middle  and  lower  classes.  During 
her  fits  of  hysteria  she  was  wont  to  utter  strange 
saj^ings,  which  the  clergy  in  the  neighbourhood  passed 
off  as  prophecies  with  a  view  to  gain.-^  Archbishop 
Warham  and  Bishop  Fisher  both  believed  in  the  in- 
spiration of  the  girl.  More  had  an  interview  with 
her,  but  refused  to  hear  her  revelations  when  he  found 
they  bore  on  the  great  political  question.  She  was  led 
by  her  employers  to  litter  predictions  of  the  misfortunes 
which  should  befall  the  king  if  he  persisted  in  di- 
vorcing Catharine.  This  caused  a  sensation,  and  in 
June,  1533,  Cranmer  thought  it  necessary  to  investigate 
the  matter.  The  nun,  the  parish  priest,  and  five  monks 
were  apprehended  and  examined ;  and  torture  revealed 
the  existence  of  a  plot  to  place  the  Princess  Mary  on 
Implicated  the   throne.      The   names   of  Fisher   and   More   were 

by  Eliza-  .  p        • 

betii  mentioned  in   this  worthless  confession.     Barton  was 

AD.  1533.  hanged  with  her  six  clerical  adherents  ;  Fisher  and 
More  were  reserved  to  be  the  victims  of  a  more  elabo- 
rate process.  To  the  "  Act  of  Succession,"  which  made 
Anne  Boleyn's  children  the  lawful  heirs  to  the  crown, 
was  attached,  on  the  sole  authority  of  the  king,  a  form 
of  oath  to  be  taken  by  the  leading  persons  in  the  State. 
This  oath  involved  a  repudiation  of  the  authority  of 
all  foreign  potentates,  despite  of  any  oath  made  to  the 
contrary  in  former  time.  To  More  and  Fisher,  who 
were  known  to  be  maintainers  of  the  papal  supremacy, 

1  Or  perhaps  to  serve  political  ends.  Dr.  Booking,  of  Canterbury,  and  Richard 
Masters  (the  incumbent  of  Aldington,  Joan's  parish)  appear  to  have  been  the 
chief  agents. 


I 


HENRY   VI I L  165 

this   oath   was   immediately   offered.      Both   professed      chap 
their  inability  to  take  it ;  they  were  consequently  com-     — _!-- 
mitted  to   the  Tower.     In   the   autumn   of   1534   theAnddis- 

.  I'll  posed  of 

"  Treason  Act     was  brought  m  to  ensure  their  destruc-  under  the 
tion.    Eefusal  to  repudiate  the  Pope  might  be  construed  Act." 
as   "  imagining "  to  the  disparagement  of  the   king's  ^'^'  ^^^^ 
titles.     The  execution  of  ten  of  the  monks  of  Charter- 
house for  their  inability  to  forswear  papal  supremacy 
was  a  presage  of  the  fate   awaiting  these  more   dis- 
tinguished culprits.     Nevertheless  their  case  was  not 
proceeded  with  till  Pope  Paul  III.,  in  May,  1535,  drove 
Henry  to  fury  by  making  Pisher  a  cardinal.      They 
were  then  tried,  condemned,  and  beheaded. 

We  have  already  noticed  More  as  one  of  the  educa-  careers  of 
tional  reformers.  He  had  attained  eminence  as  a 
lawj'cr  and  statesman,  had  been  Speaker  of  the 
Commons,  and  in  1529  was  invested  with  the  Chancel- 
lorship, a  dignity  seldom  conferred  on  a  layman. 
Though  a  reformer,  he  was  strongly  opposed  to  the 
Protestant  systems,  and  not  only  wrote  treatises  ex- 
posing their  antinomian  tendency,  but  suppressed  the 
circulation  of  their  literature  with  great  severity. 
Among  the  works  prohibited  by  More  was  Tyndale's 
translation  of  the  New  Testament,^  which  he  considered 
inaccurate,  and  likely  to  cause  ill  feeling  among  the 
lower  classes.  The  Chancellor  declared,  however,  that 
when  the  anti-Church  literature  had  been  suppressed, 
a   translation   of    the    Scripture   should   be   made   by 

1  Printed  at  Cologne  in  1525.  To  arrest  its  circulation  Warham  had  unwiselj' 
bought  up  a  whole  edition.  The  prejudice  against  unauthorized  translations  of 
Scripture  has  been  already  alluded  to.  Tyndale's  "  prologues  "  and  glosses  (the 
former  more  bulky  than  the  translation  itself)  did  not  tend  to  alter  the  opinion  of 
the  authorities.  It  is  noteworthy  that  in  some  of  Tyndale's  editions  (1531  and 
1534)  there  occurs  a  wilful  mutilation  of  the  passage,  1  Pet.  ii.  13,  14,  which 
teaches  submission  to  civil  authorities.  The  words  "  whether  it  be  to  the  king  as 
supreme"  are  omitted. 


i66  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

CHAP,  "great  learned  and  catholick  persons."  The  earliest 
— .^L.  of  More's  theological  works  is  the  "  Supplication  of 
Souls."  This  was  written  in  answer  to  the  "  Supplica- 
tion of  Beggars,"  a  scurrilous  production  in  which 
Simon  Fish  had  assailed  the  doctrine  of  purgatory,  and 
inveighed  against  the  monks  as  monopolizing  all  the 
alms  of  England.  Fish's  cause  was  taken  up  by  John 
Fryth,  an  Oxford  Lutheran,  at  this  time  harboured 
abroad.  Fryth  was  imprudent  enough  to  return  shortly 
afterwards  to  England.  He  was  apprehended  ^  by 
More's  agents,  and  brought  before  Archbishop  Cranmer 
and  other  prelates,  who  delivered  him  to  the  secular 
power  to  be  burnt  (July,  1533).  With  Eobert  Barnes, 
another  refugee,  More  disputed  on  the  nature  of  the 
Church.  Tyndale  himself  was  attacked  by  More  in 
his  "  Dialogue,"  and  a  controversy  ensued,  in  which 
his  adversary's  antinomianism  and  denial  of  sacramental 
grace  gave  More  a  strong  position.  The  epitaph  which 
More  composed  as  his  own  memorial  contains  the 
words  "  Furibns  autem  et  homicidis,  Jisereticisque  moles- 
tus."  That  he  thus  prided  himself  on  being  a  persecutor 
was  in  accordance  with  the  spirit  of  the  age.  It  appears, 
nevertheless,  a  deplorable  inconsistency  in  a  man  whose 
mind  had  entertained  the  aspirations  of  "  Utopia." 
The   pious  and  self-denyino;  Fisher  had   been,  like 

And  Bishop  ^  "^       ^  n    i  ■ 

Pisher.  Morc,  an  educational  reformer.  The  sphere  of  his 
labours  was  Cambridge,  where  he  had  been  President 
of  Queen's  College  before  his  promotion  to  the  episco- 
pate. He  had  been  selected  by  the  Lady  Margaret, 
Countess  of  Eichmond,  to  be  her  confessor.  He  per- 
suaded his  patroness  to  endow  the  foundations  of 
S.  John's  and  Christ's,  Cambridge,  and  the  two  pro- 
fessorships which  still  bear  her  name.     Yet  for  himself 

i  See  p.  192. 


HENRY   VI  11.  167 

he  refused  higher  preferment  than  the  poor  bishopric 
of  Eochester.  Fisher  had  persistently  opposed  the 
divorce  scheme,  and — partly,  perhaps,  because  he  pene- 
trated Henry's  motive  in  introducing  ecclesiastical 
changes — he  remained  unshaken  in  his  allegiance  to 
the  Pope  when  the  other  bishops  gladly  repudiated 
papal  supremacy.  Fisher  met  death  with  the  serenity 
of  a  Christian;  More,  no  less  sincere  in  his  religious 
convictions,  did  himself  injustice  by  affecting  on  the 
scaffold  the  demeanour  of  a  stoic.  The  death  of  Fisher 
afforded  intense  gratification  to  Anne  Boleyn.  The 
story  of  Herodias  and  John  Baptist  cannot  but  suggest 
itself,  when  we  read  how  Henry's  new  queen  demanded 
the  dissevered  head  and  buffeted  the  lips  that  had  once 
protested  against  her  consort's  sin.^ 

Contemporaneously  with  Cranmer  there  emerged  from  cromweii 
obscurity  a  man  of  equal  talent,  but  far  less  respectable  ascendant, 
character — Thomas  Cromwell.     This  man  headed  the  1540 
political  Protestant  party  for  several  years,  and  it  is 
to  his  influence  with  the  king  that  the  spoliation  and 
destruction  of  the  monastic  houses  is  to  be  ascribed. 
Before  treating  of  this  discreditable  work,  the  details  of 
Cromwell's  career  may  be  summarized  for  the  benefit  of 
the  student.      He  appears  to  have  been  born  at  Putliey,  his  history, 
of   obscure   parents,  in  1490.     His    early  years    were  ' 

full  of  strange  vicissitudes  and  gave  but  scant  presage 
of  his  future  greatness.  He  is  said  to  have  been  suc- 
cessively a  servant  of  the  Marchioness  of  Dorset,  a 
common  soldier  in  the  Italian  army,  and  a  clerk  in 
a  merchant's  house,  first  at  Venice,  then  at  Antwerp. 
But  the  incidents  relating  to  this  j3eriod  of  his  life  are 
not  well  anthenticated.  The  first  uncontested  fact  is 
that  he  had  risen  to  the  condition  of  a  merchant  at 

'  See  J.  H.  Blunt,  The  Reformation,  p.  422. 


i68  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

Micldleburgli  in  the  year  1512.  Before  1520  lie  had  em- 
braced the  avocation  of  a  scrivener,  with  which  he 
combined  the  lucrative  but  discreditable  business  of  a 
money-lender.  He  became  attorney  to  Cardinal  Wolsey 
before  1528,  and  appears  to  have  won  by  his  ability  the 
respect  and  confidence  of  the  great  statesman.  Though 
threatened  with  danger  by  the  impending  ruin  of 
Wolsey,  he  defended  his  master  earnestly  and  skilfully 
in  the  House  of  Commons.  The  next  we  hear  of  him 
is  that  he  had  passed  into  the  service  of  Henry,  whose 
talent  for  discovering  serviceable  tools  had  been  illus- 
trated but  a  little  while  before  by  his  promotion  of 
Cranmer.  The  scrivener's  upward  flight  was  as  rapid 
as  that  of  the  Churchman.  He  was  Master  of  the 
Jewels  in  1532 ;  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer  for  life, 
and  a  knight  in  1533 ;  Master  of  the  Eolls,  Secretary  of 
State,  and  "Vicar-General"  in  1534:.  This  newly 
coined  title  was  exchanged  for  one  equally  anomalous — 
"Vicegerent  in  Ecclesiastical  Causes" — in  1536.  For 
his  management  of  the  spoliation  of  1535-1539  he  ap- 
pears to  have  received  an  enormous  honorarium — thirty 
monastic  manors ;  to  these  were  added  the  emoluments 
of  the  deanery  of  Wells.  The  top  of  the  ladder  was 
reached  when  in  1540  he  was  made  Earl  of  Essex. 
His  scheme  Henry  had  probably  cast  a  greedy  eye  on  the 
themonas-  monastic  houses  long  before  1535,  when  he  first  pro- 
posed their  suppression  in  his  Council.  The  scheme 
of  spoliation  was  apparently  put  in  shape  by  the  man 
who  afterwards  had  charge  of  it — Thomas  Cromwell — 
who  had  acquired  a  practical  knowledge  of  the  religious 
houses  in  serving  under  Wolsey.  Henry's  object  was 
doubtless  to  replenish  an  exchequer  drained  by  his  un- 
bridled profusion  and  threatened  with  new  calls  by 
the  quarrel  with  the  emperor.     But  he  had  a  pretext  in 


HENRY   VII I.  169 

Wolsey's  project  for  reforming  the  monasteries,  since      chap. 
that  statesman   had  allowed  that  the  smaller  houses     _Ii^ 
might   well   be   suppressed.      The   reasons   which  in- 
fluenced   Wolsey    and    other    conscientious    men    in 
demanding  a  thorough  reform  of  the  monastic  houses 
were  probably  these. 

(a.)  Their  uselessness.    The  ancient  belief  that  heaven  possible 
was  most  easily  attained  by  a  life  of  monastic  seclu-  j^  its 
sion  had  worn  itself  out.      The  learning  which  had  ^^e^ence. 
once  been  monopolized  by  the  monks  had  long  found 
a    home   in    the    universities.      The    manual    labour 
by   which   the   monks   had    transmitted   literature   to 
posterity,  was  now  rendered  unnecessary  by  the  inven- 
tion of  printing. 

(h.)  The  laxity  of  the  inmates.  A  community  whose 
vocations  and  very  raison  d'etre  were  thus  antiquated 
would  naturally  become  corrupt.  The  monk  was  gene- 
rally an  idle  man,  and  did  not  pretend  to  that  asceti- 
cism which  had  once  been  held  to  justify  idleness. 
Many  of  the  inmates  were  married ;  more  ought  to 
have  been.  In  some  cases,  notably  at  Fountains,  Bury, 
Walden,  and  Langdon,  the  superior  was  a  person  of 
profligate  habits  or  unbridled  passions,  and  the  subordi- 
nates followed  his  bad  example.  In  many  the  superior 
was  doubtless  elected  simply  because  he  was  no  dis- 
ciplinarian. Nevertheless,  the  sweeping  charge  of 
immorality  so  often  levelled  against  the  monks  and 
nuns  of  the  sixteenth  century  was  unknown  to  con- 
temporary censors  of  any  character.  Many  good  men 
desired  a  sweeping  reform  of  the  religious  houses,  but 
they  had  not  discovered  what  Cromwell's  inquisitors 
reported — that  two-thirds  of  them  were  defiled  by 
abominable  impurities.  Such  imputations  originated 
with  men  who  were  interested  in  discovering  facts  to 


I70  ECCLESIA  ANGLICANA. 

CHAP,     the  prejudice  of  the  houses,  who  showed  themselves 
^"^;      in  other  matters  glaringly  unscrupulous,  and  who  had 
no   time   to   investigate   fairly   the   scandalous   gossip 
which  they  reported  as  matter  of  fact. 

(c.)  Their  injurious  influence  on  the  Church.  The 
immunity  of  the  religious  houses  from  episcopal  control 
was  calculated  to  weaken  the  system  of  diocesan  dis- 
cipline and  aggrandize  the  see  of  Rome.  The  regular 
clergy  had  hitherto  acknowledged  no  ecclesiastical 
authority  save  that  of  the  Pope,  and  had  often  caused 
great  disturbance  by  the  resistance  they  oifered  to  the 
diocesans.  The  system  of  "  appropriations,"  by  which 
the  tithes  of  benefices  belonged  to  the  monastic  house 
and  the  care  of  souls  to  an  ill-paid  vicar,  has  been 
already  mentioned.  Often,  perhaps,  as  little  of  the 
money  was  spent  on  the  parish  churches  as  under  the 
regime  of  lay  impropriators  by  which  Henry  replaced 
this  system. 

(^.)  Their  injurious  influence  on  the  State.  The  number 
of  houses  was  grossly  disproportionate  to  the  popula- 
tion ;  so  too  were  their  nominal  revenues  to  the  wealth 
of  England.  They  numbered  more  than  six  hundred. 
It  is  estimated  that  they  actually  enjoyed  a  tenth  of 
the  capital  of  the  country,  and  that  they  might  be 
credited  with  a  larger  proportion  than  this  but  for 
their  practice  of  giving  long  leases.  Much  of  this 
wealth  went  out  of  England  to  meet  the  exactions 
of  the  Pope,  and  the  present  relations  of  England  and 
Rome  were  incompatible  with  the  continuance  of  such 
tribute. 
Precedents.  The  powcr  of  the  Crown  to  dissolve  or  transform 
religious  corporations  had  been  illustrated  by  cases 
occurring  in  the  fourteenth  and  fifteenth  centuries. 
The  Knight  Templars  had  been  dissolved  in  1307,  and 


HENRY   VIII.  171 

a  papal  bull  put  their  property  in  tlie  hands  of  the  chap. 
king  for  a  time.  It  was  finally  assigned  by  an  Act  ^U^ 
of  Parliament  to  the  brethren  of  the  Hospital  of  S. 
John  of  Jerusalem.  In  1416,  again,  the  war  with 
France  suggested  the  propriety  of  dissolving  the  "  alien 
priories "  in  England.  Here  also  the  property  was 
transferred  to  other  foundations.  With  some  of  the 
lands  the  monasteries  of  Sheen  and  Sion  were  en- 
dowed; others  were  given  to  New  College  and 
Winchester.  Neither  case  afforded  a  precedent  for 
the  alienation  of  religious  property  to  secular  uses.^ 
Wolsey,  as  we  have  shown,  had  proposed  to  treat  the 
smaller  monasteries  as  the  "alien  priories"  had  been 
treated,  transferring  their  endowments  to  more  useful 
centres  of  religious  education.  For  this  project,  besides 
the  cases  cited  above,  he  could  find  precedents  in  the 
dealings  of  Archbishop  Chicheley,  the  founder  of  All 
Souls ;  of  Bishop  Waynfleet,  the  founder  of  Magdalen, 
Oxford ;  or  of  Bishop  Alcock,  who  had  recently  trans- 
formed S.  Ehadagund's  Nunnery  into  Jesus  College, 
Cambridge. 

After  the  cardinal's  overthrow,  Henry  had  seized  on  Detailed 
those  monastic  revenues  which  had  been  destined  to  the  scheme. 
enrich  Oxford.  The  endowments  of  the  cardinal's 
colleges  and  professorships,  though  subsidized  by  the 
fine  unjustly  wrung  from  the  clergy,  only  filled  the 
exchequer  for  a  few  years.  Then  the  king  conferred 
with  his  Council  as  to  the  propriety  of  a  general  spolia- 
tion  of  the   monastic   houses.     To  effect   this  a  com- 


1  That  such  alienation  was  legal  is,  however,  hardly  deniable.  Kennett  points 
out  that  "  according  to  the  most  ancient  laws  of  the  kingdom,"  where  it  could  be 
proved  that  Church  property  was  applied  without  regard  to  "  the  use,  cause,  con- 
dition, or  terms  of  the  primary  donation,"  it  lapsed' to  the  heirs  of  those  who  had 
conferred  it.  And  the  Crown,  of  course,  had  the  right  to  such  property,  if  owner- 
ship could  not  be  proved.    See  Kennett  on  Appropriations,  p.  111. 


172  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

CHAP,  mission  was  appointed  to  act  under  Cromwell.  It  was 
_Ii!^  to  set  on  foot  a  visitation,  which  was  to  be  the  basis 
of  a  foimal  report  as  to  the  state  of  the  houses.  This 
report  was  to  be  laid  before  Parliament,  as  a  pretext 
for  a  Bill  of  Dissolution.  The  members  of  the  com- 
mission were  unscrupulous  persons  ^  chosen  by  Cromwell. 
Leigh,  Leighton,  London,  and  Ap  Rice  were  to  pre- 
side over  the  visitation  of  monks  and  nuns ;  Richard 
Thornton,  the  bishop-suifragan  of  Dover,  over  that  of 
the  friars.  Subordinated  to  these  were  several  other 
persons  of  similar  character.  Lest  the  bishops  should 
stop  the  sacrilegious  work  which  was  the  real  object 
of  this  visitation,  a  most  singular  use  was  made  of 
A.D.1535.  the  royal  supremacy.  Thomas  Cromwell  was  ap- 
pointed to  "  treat  and  examine  all  causes  ecclesiastical " 
as  the  king's  representative.  He  had  power  to  nominate 
persons  who  should  "  visit  all  and  singular  churches, 
even  metropolitan  churches,  cathedrals,  and  collegiate 
churches,  hospitals,  and  monasteries,"  and  have  autho- 
rity to  sequestrate  revenues,  make  statutes,  call  synods, 
hold  courts,  receive  resignations,  preside  at  and  direct 
the  elections  of  prelates,  institute  and  induct  into 
possession  of  churches,  etc.  Cromwell's  nominees  were 
thus  put  on  the  footing  of  bishops ;  while  the  diocesans 
had  their'jurisdiction  suspended  by  another  instrument, 
which  forbade  them  "  to  visit  the  monasteries,  churches, 
etc.,  or  to  exercise  any  jurisdiction,  or  in  any  way 
to   interfere   with   our   general    visitation."     Cranmer 

1  That  they  were  chosen  because  unscrupulous  can  hardly  be  contested.  London 
had  afterwards  to  do  penance  for  gross  immorality,  and  died  a  prisoner  in  the 
Fleet  on  the  charge  of  perjury.  Leighton,  a  man  of  similar  character,  pandered  to 
the  king's  vices,  and  by  bribes  secured  the  deanery  of  York.  After  his  death  it 
was  found  that  he  had  pawned  the  cathedral  plate.  The  arrogance  and  the  extor- 
tions of  Leigh  were  complained  of  to  Cromwell  by  one  of  his  fellow-commissioners. 
On  the  statements  of  these  and  similar  persons  the  oft-cited  indictments  against 
the  monks  are  really  based. 


HENRY   VIII.  173 

having  acquiesced  in  this  arrangement  with  his  Tisiial  chap. 
complaisance,  the  visitation  of  houses  with  incomes  — ^-^ 
tinder  £200  began.  The  visitors  were  ostensibly  an  its  execu- 
inqnisitorial  body  who  came  with  the  purpose  ofpressionof 
compiling  a  report.  They  were  instructed,  however,  to  i^ousS^ 
put  such  pressure  on  the  religious  corporations  as  to 
compel  them  to  resignation.  And  their  more  special 
care  was  to  strip  these  establishments  of  the  jewels, 
crosses,  and  ecclesiastical  ornaments  with  which  the 
piety  of  former  years  had  enriched  them.  These  were 
packed  and  forwarded  to  London.  The  visitation  began 
in  October,  1535.  Absurd  though  it  may  appear,  three 
months  were  considered  sufficient  time  for  the  compila- 
tion of  a  rej)ort  on  the  state  of  the  religious  houses,  and 
in  February,  1536,  a  Bill  was  brought  in  for  the  dissolu- 
tion of  those  with  incomes  under  £200  a  year.  The 
"  Black  Book,"  as  the  report  of  the  visitors  was  called, 
was,  of  course,  filled  with  such  scandalous  stories  about 
the  lives  of  the  monks  and  nuns  as  could  be  raked  up  in 
the  neighbourhood  of  the  various  houses.  It  is  not 
much  to  be  regretted  that  it  was  destroyed  in  Queen 
Mary's  time;  had  it  survived  its  testimony  would  be 
worthless.  It  served,  however,  to  give  a  high  moral 
tone  to  proceedings  of  which  royal  cupidity  was  the 
true  explanation.  Prudence  suggested  that  the  larger 
houses  should  not  yet  be  attacked,  and  the  abbots  in  the 
Upper  House  seemed  to  have  sacrificed  their  weaker 
brethren  in  the  hope  of  thus  saving  themselves.  They 
offered  no  resistance  to  the  Bill  of  February,  1536. 
The  revenues  of  the  three  hundred  and  seventy-six 
smaller  houses  thus  lapsed  to  the  king,  to  be  disposed 
of  "  to  the  honour  of  God." 

By  the  "  Act  of  Suppression  "  and  the  previous  loot 
Henry  appears  to  have  secured  about  a  million  and  a 


174 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


CHAP. 
VIII, 


Second 
visitation. 
Enforced 
resigna- 
tion of  the 
larger 
houses. 


The  "Pil- 
grimage of 
Grace." 
AD.  1536-7. 


quarter  of  modern  money.  A  great  part  of  tliis  booty, 
however,  had  to  be  dispersed  among  the  aristocracy  to 
purchase  connivance  at  a  more  extensive  spoliation. 
A  Court  of  Augmentation  was  established  to  gather  in 
the  revenues,  and  a  second  visitation  was  undertaken  by 
agents  of  this  court  to  complete  the  demolition  of  the 
doomed  establishments,  and  to  harass  the  larger  houses. 
Such  of  these  as  should  resign  lapsed,  according  to  the 
recent  Act,  to  the  king.  Every  effort  was  made,  there- 
fore, to  coerce  them  to  resignation.  The  inmates  were 
freely  paid  to  accuse  one  another  of  breaches  of  dis- 
cipline,^ that  the  reputations  of  the  communities  might 
be  disparaged.  Temptations  of  a  more  hateful  character 
were  offered  to  the  nuns  with  a  similar  motive. 
Preachers  were  sent  about  the  country  to  defame  the 
monastic  establishments  in  sermons.  The  gentry  were 
promised  and  actually  given  a  liberal  share  of  the 
plunder ;  the  secular  clergy  were  soothed  with  promises 
of  the  rectorial  tithes,  hitherto  held  by  the  monasteries, 
and  really  destined  to  pass  into  the  more  tenacious  grasp 
of  lay  impropriators. 

The  j)rogress  of  this  business  was  delayed  by  an 
insurrection,  incited  perhaps  by  the  expelled  regulars, 
but  joined  in  readily  b}^  the  lower  classes,  who  were 
mainly  dependent  on  the  religious  houses  for  education, 
alms,  and  employment.  The  "  Pilgrimage  of  Grace  " 
began  at  Louth  in  Lincolnshire,  and  spread  throughout 
the  eastern  and  northern  counties.  The  insurgent 
forces  were  headed  by  Robert  Aske,  a  Yorkshire  squire  ; 
with  him  were  Lords  Darcy  and  Hussey,  and  the 
Archbishop  of  York.  Marching  under  a  standard 
marked  with  the  five  wounds  of  Christ,  the  insurgents 


1  See  Fuller,  Ch.  Hist.,  ii.  215,  216,  ed.  1837 ;  aud  cf.  State  Papers,  Henry  VIII., 
vii.  540. 


HENRY   VIII.  175 

clamoured  for  a  redress  of  the  Churcli's  wrongs.  The  chap. 
chief  ground  of  complaint  was,  of  course,  the  recent  mis- 
treatment of  the  religious  houses.  But  the  whole 
ecclesiastical  policy  of  the  king  was  really  disparaged 
by  the  insurgents.  The  northern  clergy  who  joined  in 
this  movement  held  a  kind  of  convocation,  to  condemn 
the  recent  measures  affecting  the  Church.  They  voted 
that  no  temporal  officer  can  be  supreme  head  of  the 
Church  or  have  jurisdiction  in  the  same ;  that  the  Pope, 
having  been  declared  head  of  the  Church  by  Councils, 
ought  to  be  so  regarded ;  that  papal  dispensations  and 
indulgences  are  efficacious ;  that  lands  given  for  pious 
uses  cannot  be  alienated  for  secular  purposes.  In  oppo- 
sition perhaps  to  the  Ten  Articles  recently  accepted  by 
the  southern  Convocation,  they  denounced  all  such  as 
preached  against  purgatory,  pilgrimages,  and  worship- 
ping of  saints  and  images. 

Henry  preferred  to  quell  this  rebellion  by  diplomacy 
of  a  questionable  character.  He  held  out  hopes  of 
meeting  the  demands  of  the  insurgents,  and  he  pro- 
mised a  general  pardon.  He  was  thus  enabled  to  secure 
the  persons  of  the  leaders.  The  undisciplined  rabble 
was  then  routed,  and  the  royal  word  was  dishonoured 
by  the  execution  of  Darcy,  Hussey,  Aske,  twelve 
abbots,  and  many  clergy.  The  insurrection  was  a 
pretext  for  heavier  pressure  on  the  surviving  corpora- 
tions.    A  third  visitation  was  instituted  in  the  summer  r^^.  •, 

Third  and 

of  1537,  to  charo;e  them,  wherever  possible,  with  com-  final  visita- 
plicity  m  the  late  insurrection,  and  to  induce  them 
by  systematic  intimidation  to  a  so-called  voluntary 
surrender.  Great  was  the  satisfaction  of  the  inquisitors, 
and  less  harsh  the  fate  of  their  victims,  if  the  latter 
could  be  coerced  to  attest  the  justice  of  the  spoliation 
by  putting  their  names  to  ready-made  confessions  of 


Fate  of  the 


176  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

CHAP,  misdemeanour  and  immorality.  Such  compliance  was 
'^"^'  rewarded  by  an  augmentation  of  the  miserable  pension 
with  which  the  ejected  regulars  were  turned  adrift. 
On  the  other  hand,  it  was  easy  to  entangle  such  as 
were  not  amenable  to  persuasion  within  the  meshes 
of  the  law.  It  was  held  treasonable  for  an  abbot  to 
conceal  the  property  of  his  own  church.  For  thus 
ejected.  attempting  to  save  Glastonbury  from  spoliation,  Abbot 
Whiting,  a  man  of  blameless  character,  was  slaughtered, 
or,  as  Cromwell  words  it  in  his  own  memorandum  on 
the  subject,  it  was  decided  that  "  he  should  be  tried 
and  also  be  executed."  It  is  satisfactory  to  find  that 
in  some  few  cases  adequate  provision  was  made  for  the 
victims  of  royal  avarice.  Tewkesbury,  where  the 
abbot's  income  was  to  be  £266  13s.  4fL,  and  that  of 
the  monks  at  least  £6  13s.  4c?.,  appears  to  have  fared 
best  of  all  the  religious  houses.  Some  abbots  had  as 
little  as  £6  ;  and  not  a  few  monks  appear  to  have  been 
compelled  to  begin  life  afresh  with  a  single  payment 
of  forty  shillings  and  a  priest's  gown.  The  pension  of 
the  nuns  was  usually  less  than  that  of  the  monks. 
What  the  trials  of  some  of  these  disbanded  regulars 
must  have  been  may  easil}^  be  conceived.  A  testimony 
to  their  misery  may  be  found  in  the  sanguinary  Acts 
against  mendicancy  which  shortly  followed.  So  suc- 
cessful was  this  final  visitation  that  there  was  no 
occasion  for  any  Act  suppressing  the  large  houses. 
The  previous  Act  had  given  to  the  Crown  all  such 
monasteries  as  should  resign  within  the  twelve  months 
following;  the  only  legislation  now  required  was  an 
Act  legalizing  the  plunder  of  the  houses  which  had 
resigned  after  the  expiration  of  the  twelvemonth. 
Ex  post  This  ex  post  facto  sanction  was  given  by  an  Act 
of  1539.  passed  in  the  spring  of  1539,  which  is  sometimes  mis- 
termed  the  second  "  Act  of  Suppression." 


HENRY   VIII.  177 

The  barbarous  treatment  of  tbe  edifices  and  their 
costly  accessories,  which  was  the  immediate  result  of 
the  visitation,  has  been  alluded  to.  The  bells,  glass,  vandaiisir 
lead,  pavement,  timber,  and  carved  work  were  sold 
for  a  mere  song,  or  were  left  to  the  mercy  of  the 
rabble.  The  jewels,  moneys,  and  plate  were  carefully 
packed  up  to  become  the  prey  of  robbers  of  a  higher 
class.  Some  pains  were  taken  to  prevent  the  utter  loss 
of  the  literary  treasures  of  the  monasteries.  John 
Leland,  the  king's  antiquary,  and  John  Bale  were 
engaged  at  this  time  in  making  extracts  from  the 
chronicles  and  other  manuscripts  of  the  monks. 

Nevertheless  the  damage  done  to  the  cause  of  English 
literature^  in  this  season  of  spoliation  was  incalculable. 
It  must  also  be  added  that  with  the  monasteries  the 
ecclesiastical  style  of  art  perished — architecture  sus- 
taining a  blow  which  it  has  never  recovered, — and  that 
the  ruin  of  the  great  educational  nurseries  necessitated 
that  decadence  at  the  universities  which  was  so  bitterly 
deplored  by  Latimer. 

Mr.  Perry  estimates  that  the  gross  gain  which  accrued  How  the 
to  the  Crown  by  the  dissolution  of  the  monasteries  was,  spent. 
in  modern  value,  £38,400,000.  Even  in  view  of  the 
reckless  extravagance  of  Henry's  court,  the  system  of 
bribery  which  the  scheme  entailed,^  and  the  king's 
habit  of  lavishing  gifts  of  preposterous  value  on  the 
favourites  of  the  hour,  the  fate  of  these  enormous 
revenues  cannot  be  accounted  for.  The  portion  ceded, 
by  way  of  compensation,  to  the  causes  of  philanthropy 

'  See  Bale's  own  account  in  the  Declaration  upon  Leland's  Journal,  1549. 

^  Lord  Audley,  the  Chancellor,  received  eight  monastic  demesnes  ;  Lord  Clinton, 
thirteen;  Cranmer,  eight  (some  of  them  for  poor  relations  and  dependents)  ;  Lord 
Russell,  three  of  great  value  ;  Lord  Parr,  four;  the  Duke  of  Norfolk,  thirteen; 
the  Duke  of  Northumberland,  eighteen ;  the  Duke  of  Somerset,  thirteen  ;  the  Duke 
of  Suffolk,  thirty. 

N 


178 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


CHAP. 
VIII. 


Effect  on 
the  House 
of  Ijords 
and  ttie 
cathedrals. 


and  religion  was  scanty  indeed.  Of  revenues  so  spent 
the  foUowins:  is  the  account : — S.  Bartholomew's  and 
S.  Thomas's  Hospitals  were  allowed  to  remain  endowed, 
for  the  use  of  the  poorer  classes.  Some  of  the  mo- 
nasteries were  turned  into  collegiate  churches  {e.g. 
Eipon,  Beverley,  and  Manchester) ;  others  survived  to 
be  converted  into  parish  churches,  as  S.  Albans,  Croy- 
land,  Stow,  Malvern,  etc.  In  most  of  these  cases,  some 
part  at  least  of  the  ancient  revenues  was  usually  re- 
tained as  an  endowment.  At  Oxford,  Wolsey's  splendid 
plans  with  respect  to  Christ  Church  were  completed  in 
a  meagre  fashion.  Cambridge,  more  fortunate,  gained 
the  magnificent  institution  of  Trinity  College.  Six 
new  sees  were  founded  and  inadequately  endowed,  viz. 
Oseney  (near  Oxford),  Peterborough,  Bristol,  Gloucester, 
Chester,  and  Westminster.  The  last-named  became  the 
prey  of  Edward's  Council,  and  was  never  restored  to 
its  episcopal  dignity. 

The  dissolution  of  the  monasteries  necessarily  in- 
volved a  complete  change  in  the  character  of  the  House 
of  Lords.  Hitherto  the  majority  of  the  members  had 
been  spiritual  lords,  since  the  abbots  and  priors  who 
had  seats  were  far  more  numerous  than  the  bishops. 
The  ejection  of  these  practically  changed  the  House 
from  an  ecclesiastical  to  a  lay  assembly.  The  cathedral 
system  was  also  affected  by  the  downfall  of  the 
monks.  In  eight  of  the  cathedrals — Canterbury,  Win- 
chester, Durham,  Ely,  Norwich,  Worcester,  Carlisle, 
and  Rochester — the  chapters  were  composed  of  regular 
clerg5\  As  the  regulars  had  always  professed  to  be 
independent  of  episcopal  authority,  this  organization 
was  necessarily  detrimental  to  diocesan  discipline.  In 
some  cases,  moreover,  the  secular  clergy  had  really  a 
prior  claim  to  the  cathedral  emoluments,  the  regulars 


HENRY   VII I.  179 

having   succeeded   in    ousting    their   brethren   in    the      chap. 
Norman  period,  when  the  monastic  system  was  in  the     ,  V^\ 
ascendant.      On    these   grounds   the   establishment   of 
secular  canons  in  such  towns,  and  the  conversion  of  the  -• 

cathedral  priories  into  colleges,  might  be  defended. 

The  restoration  of  a  secular  chapter  at  Canterbury,  The  loot  at 
where^the  monks  of  Christ  Church  had  held  sway  since  bury^^ 
the  Conquest,  was  preceded  by  a  curious  manifestation  "^•^■■^^^®- 
of    hostility   against   the    mart^-red    Thomas    Becket. 
Hitherto  no  English  saint  had  received  so  much  vene- 
ration as  S.  Thomas  of  Canterbury.     His  influence  in 
the  next  v^orld  was  attested  by  miracles,  his  popularity 
in  this  by  a  shrine  which  literally  blazed  with  gold  and 
precious  stones.     But  to  Henry  the  canonized  primate 
was  odious,  as  personifying  the  triumph  of  the  Church 
over  the  throne.     "  Thomas  Becket  "  was  gravely  cited 
by  the  Attorney-General  to  answ^er  a  charge  of  treason, 
contumacy,  and  rebellion.     Thirty  days  in  succession 
a   pursuivant   read   this   summons   at   the    celebrated 
shrine.    Neglecting  to  regard  it,  the  contumacious  saint 
was  deprived  of  his  festival,  special  office,  and   other 
commemorative  honours,  and  the  priceless  treasures  of 
his   shrine  were   appropriated   by  the   king   (August, 
1538).     This  proceeding  caused  great    indignation  in 
the    papal    court.      A   sentence    of    excommunication 
against  Henry  had  been  pending  ever  since  the  exe- 
cution of  Bishop  Fisher,  but  the  intervention  of  the 
King  of  France  had  stayed  its  publication.     Paul  III.  g-g 
now  issued  the  bull  declaring  Henry  excommunicate  excom- 

°  ''  muDicated, 

and   deposed,    and   his   subjects   absolved    from    their 
allegiance. 

We  must  now  resume  our  account  of  the  religious  Progress  of 
Eeformation  of  this  reign.     The  constitutional  change  tion. 
which  emancipated  England  from  the  tyranny  of  the 


i8o  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

CHAP,  papal  court  was,  as  we  have  oTDserved,  acceptaV)le  at  first 
_.„J:_  to  almost  all  classes.  As  to  the  propriety  of  making 
changes  in  matters  of  doctrine  there  was  not  the  same 
unanimity.  And  the  course  of  royal  policy  with  refer- 
ence to  the  Church  becomes  henceforth  difficult  to 
follow,  inasmuch  as  Henry  was  induced  by  interest  or 
religious  sympathies  to  patronize  now  the  men  of  the 
state  of       Old,  now  those  of  the  New  Learning.     An  account  of 

parties.  ,  . 

the  chief  agencies  which  regulated  the  course  of  Re- 
formation in  this  reign  will  make  the  events  we  have 
to  describe  more  intelligible.  (1)  On  the  throne  was  a 
man  well  read  in  theology,  who  had  a  real  wish  for  the 
Church's  welfare,  but  a  stronger  wish  to  enjoy  undis- 
puted supremacy  and  inexhaustible  revenues.  The 
party  which  could  best  minister  to  these  latter  tastes 
could  usually  count  on  securing  consideration  for  its 
theological  tenets.  Henry's  own  views,  when  not 
biased,  might  now  be  defined  as  Catholicism  without 
the  Pope.  He  was  a  strong  believer  in  the  efficacy  of 
sacraments,  was  regular  in  his  attendance  at  mass,  had 
little  sympathy  for  the  new  hair-splitting  controversies 
about  justification  by  faith,  and  was  very  determined 
that  the  modern  religionists  should  not  disturb  public 
peace  or  endanger  constituted  authority  in  England,  as 
they  had  done  abroad.  (2)  The  party  henceforth  known 
as  the  men  of  the  "  Old  Learning  "  were  for  the  most 
part  prepared  to  be  rid  of  papal  supremacy,  provided 
its  repudiation  did  not  lead  to  precipitate  changes  in 
doctrine  and  discipline.  How  far  reform  ought  to  go 
they  were  not  agreed.  These  men  were  much  frightened 
by  Henry's  spoliation  of  the  monasteries.  Many  of 
them,  as  we  have  seen,  would  now  fain  retrace  their 
steps,  and  restore  to  the  Pope  the  powers  which  the 
king  had  so  much  abused.     Most  of  them  were  hence- 


HENRY   VIIL  i8i 

forth  anti-reformers  rather  perhaps  from  caution  than      chap. 
conviction.     Some,  however,  became  so  pronounced  in       ^i". 
their  repudiation  of  the  royal  supremacy  as  to  bring 
on  themselves  the  penalties  of  the  law ;  and  this  cause 
produced  more  martyrs  in  England  than  that  of  Pro- 
testantism.    The  leading  men  of  this  party  were  Lee, 
Archbishop   of  York;     Tonstal,   Bishop    of    Durham; 
Stokesley,  Bishop  of  London ;  and  Gardiner,  Bishop  of 
Winchester.     (3)  The  party  of  the  "  New  Learning " 
included  many  heterogeneous  elements.    Its  most  respect- 
able members  were  men  who  were  actuated  by  a  sincere 
desire  to  reform  the  Church,  and  who  thought  this  might 
be  done  by  applying  to  all  the  doctrines  and  practices 
assailed  by  Luther  the  test  of  Scripture  and  primitive 
Confessions.     They  were  prepared  to  accept  whatever 
changes  should  be  thus  sanctioned,  but  they  were  for 
the  most  part  determined  not  to  decatholize  the  Church 
in  Protestant  fashion.     They  had  not,  however,  a  very 
high  idea  of  the  prerogatives  of  the  spiritualty,  and 
they  did   not  object  when   Henry   issued   licences  to 
bishops,  suspended  and  restored  their  powers,  or  obtruded 
on  Convocation  a  lay  "Vicar-General"  as  president — 
proceedings  which  somewhat  staggered  the  men  of  the 
Old  Learning,    At  the  head  of  this  school  were  Cranmer, 
the  primate  ;  Goodrich,  Bishop  of  Ely  ;  Latimer,  Bishop 
of  Worcester ;    Fox,  Bishop  of  Hereford ;    and  Hilsey, 
Bishop  of  Rochester.     But  the  New  Learning  had  also 
adherents  of  a  very   different  character.     It  was  dis- 
paraged by  sectaries  and  fanatics  of  the  lower  orders, 
whose  impatience  could  not  brook  the  leisurely  method 
of  reform  contemplated  by  their  ecclesiastical  superiors, 
and  whose  silly  and  irreverent  tirades  on  the  grave 
questions  at  issue  frequently  brought  them  to  condign 
punishment.     It  had  also,  like  the   Lollard  school,  a 


i82  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

CHAP,  following  of  demagogues  and  socialist  agitators,  sucli  as 
^^^;  reap  a  harvest  off  all  can.ses  that  are  subversive  of 
establislied  system.  Worst  of  all,  the  New  Learning 
had,  in  the  upper  classes,  champions  of  the  Cromwell 
type — men  who  affected  anti- Church  sentiments  with 
the  view  of  raising  themselves  to  opulence  or  political 
importance,  and  who  would  pander  to  Henry's  avarice 
at  the  expense  of  the  ecclesiastical  revenues. 
The  foreign  In  1535-36  Cromwell's  machinery  for  despoiling  the 
and  Henry,  nionasteries  was  working  well,  and  the  anti-Church 
party  was  in  high  favour  at  court.  The  Protestant 
princes  of  Germany  met  at  Smalcald  to  form  a  league 
in  support  of  the  new  religious  systems.  The  English 
king  was,  it  seems,  nearly  persuaded  to  identify  his 
cause  with  Protestantism  by  joining  in  this  league. 
Such  a  course  would  probably  have  necessitated  the 
acceptance  of  the  "  Confession  of  Augsburg."  Gardiner 
was  fortunately  at  hand  to  insist  that  union  with  the  Pio- 
testants  would  be  derogatory  to  English  independence, 
and  would  really  impede  the  desired  Eeformation.  The 
king  gave  up  this  project,  but  so  far  deferred  to  Pro- 
testantism as  to  draw  up  Articles  for  the  English  Church 
which  were  partly  based  on  the  Augsburg  "  Confession." 
The  Ten  In  the  preparation  of  the  Ten  Articles  the  king  was 
pass2^  helped  probably  by  Cianmer  and  Fux.  Policy  or 
A.D.  1536.  iiigher  motives  infused  into  this  formulary  a  spirit  of 
concession,  so  that  while  it  was  a  compliment  to  the 
Protestants,  it  enforced  on  the  conservative  party  at 
home  nothing  which  they  would  deem  objectionable. 
Convocation  was  at  this  time  sitting,  with  Cromwell  as 
President  of  the  Upper  House,  the  King  having  deter- 
mined that  his  ignorant  "  Vicar-General  "  should  have 
all  the  honour  which  Church  assemblies  had  formerly 
paid  to  the  papal  legate  a  latere.     To  Convocation  then 


VIII. 


HENRY   VIII,  183 

the  Articles  were  sent,  and  by  botli  Houses  they  were      chap. 
readily  accepted.      The   Ten  Articles  may  be   briefly 
summarized  thus : — 

I.  The  foundations  of  the  faith — are  the  Scriptures 
and  three  Creeds,  as  interpreted  by  the  four  Holy 
Councils  and  by  approved  doctors  of  the  Church.  What 
these  interpreters  have  condemned  ought  to  be  repro- 
bated by  all  clergymen. 

II.  Baptism — is  necessary  to  salvation,  as  cleansing 
from  sin  and  conferring  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost: 
it  ought  to  be  administered  to  infants. 

III.  Penance — is  a  sacrament  instituted  for  the  re- 
covery of  those  who  have  fallen  away  after  baptism  ;  it 
requires  contrition,  confession,  and  amendment :  the 
absolution  is  pronounced  by  the  priest  on  the  authority 
given  to  him  by  Christ  in  the  Gospel. 

IV.  The  sacrament  of  the  Altar  : — The  self-same  Body 
and  Blood  of  the  Saviour  which  were  born  of  the  Virgin 
Mary  are  declared  to  be  present,  under  the  form  of 
bread  and  wine,  "  vere,  suhstantialiter,^  et  realiter." 

V.  Justification — is  said  to  be  "  attained  by  contrition 
and  faith  joined  with  charity  for  the  sake  of  the  merits 
of  Christ's  Passion." 

VI.  Images — are  useful  as  helps  to  prayer,  but  care 
must  be  taken  lest  the  reverence  paid  to  them  lead  to 
idolatry ;  they  are  not  to  be  censed  or  presented  with 
offerings. 

VII.  Saints — are  to  be  honoured,  not  with  the  honour 
due  to  God,  but  to  the  end  that  Christ  may  be  glorified 
for  the  virtues  He  has  planted  in  them. 

VIIL  Prayers  to  saints — are  permitted,  not  because 
saints  can  take  the  place  of  the  One  Mediator,  but 
because  they  can  intercede  with  God  on  man's  behalf. 

^  The  term  substantialiter  implies,  of  course,  the  dogma  of  transubstantiation. 


i84  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

CHAP.  I^-  Rites  and   ceremonies — whether  as  pertains  to 

viir.  vestments  or  to  such  practices  as  using  candles  on 
Candlemas  Day,  ashes  on  the  first  day  of  Lent,  palms 
on  the  last  Sunday  in  Lent,  etc.,  are  esteemed  useful  and 
laudable,  "  not  as  having  power  to  remit  sin,  but  only 
to  stir  and  lift  up  our  minds  to  God." 

X.  Purgatory  : — The  place  where  souls  departed  abide 
is  not  known,  "  nor  the  name  thereof  and  kind  of  pains 
therein,"  but  prayers  and  masses  on  their  behalf  are  a 
charitable  work,  though  abused  by  the  Bishop  of  Rome. 
Progress  of  This  Convocation  also  ruled  that  Church  holidays 
measures,  had  been  so  multiplied  as  to  conduce  to  idleness  and 
lewdness  rather  than  real  devotion ;  it  therefore  abolished 
many  of  the  minor  Church  holidays — those  especially 
which  fell  in  the  harvest  season.  It  also  appointed  one 
day  (the  first  Sunday  in  October)  to  be  observed  as  the 
Feast  of  Dedication  by  all  churches.  In  view  of  the 
Pope's  proposal  to  hold  a  General  Council  at  Mantua  in 
1537,  Convocation  voted  that  though  true  General 
Councils  were  most  valuable,  a  Council  summoned  "  not 
Christianly  and  charitably,  but  for  and  upon  private 
malice  and  ambition,  or  other  worldly  respects,"  was 
worthless,  and  that  "  neither  the  Bishop  of  Rome  nor 
any  one  prince  "  had  power  to  call  a  General  Council 
without  the  express  consent  of  i\i^  residue  of  Christian 
princes,  "  and  specially  such  as  have  im^erium  merum — 
that  is,  the  whole  entire  and  supreme  government  and 
authority  over  all  their  subjects." 

The  Ten  Articles  were  published  by  the  king  as 
*'  devised  by  the  kinges  highnes  majestic  to  stablyshe 
Christen  quietnes  amonge  us,"  and  as  "  approved  by 
the  consent  and  determination  of  the  holy  clergie." 
"  Christen  quietnes  "  was  further  insured  by  an  order 
suspending   all  clergy,   except  bishops   and   cathedral 


HENRY   VIH.  185 

preachers,  from  their  pulpit  duties  until  Michaelmas.      chap. 
The  parish  priests  were  thus  prevented  from  speaking       '^"i- 
on  behalf  of  the  monasteries.     By  virtue  of  his  supre-  Royai 
niacy  the  king  issued  at  the  same  time  a  set  of  "  In-  tions." 
junctions  "  to  the  clergy.     These  were  ten  in  number.  ^'^  ^^^^' 
The  clergy  were   enjoined    to   preach   once  a  quarter 
against  the  Pope ;  to  inform  their  people  as  to  the  new 
arrangements  about  holidays,  and  as  to  the  doctiine  of 
the  Ten  Articles  with  respect  to  ceremonies,  saints,  and 
images ;  to  make  them  learn  intelligently  the  Creed, 
Lord's  Prayer,  and  Ten  Commandments  in  the  vulgar 
tongue ;  to  provide  for  the  proper  administration  of  the 
sacraments ;    to    live   soberly  and  studiously ;   to  give 
alms ;  to  tax  themselves  to  provide  one  exhibition  at 
the   universities   for   every   £100    of  income;    and   to 
expend  one-fifth  of  their  benefices  on  the  repair  of  their 
chancels  and  glebe  houses. 

Hitherto  the  two  great  parties  in  Convocation  had  Proceed- 
worked   together  harmoniously.     The  insurrection   in  vocation, 
the  north  did  much  to  impair  this  good  feeling,  and 
when  Convocation  met  in  January,  1537,  there  was  some 
angry  speaking  on  the  subject  of  the  minor  sacraments. 
Cromwell  insulted  the  House  by  introducing  a  Scotch 
Protestant  refugee,  named  Aless  or  Allen,  to  act  as  his 
^<pokesman.     This  person  joined  in  the  debate  on  the 
fii'st  day  of  session,  but  his  intrusion  was  not  afterwards 
tolerated.^    The  Eeforming  party  demanded  a  formulary  The 
to  take  the  place  of  the  Ten  Articles  as  an  exposition  bS)?°^^ 
of  the  Church's  faith,  this  document  being  considered 
meagre   and   unsatisfactory.     Application  was  accord- 
ingly made  to  the  king,  and  a  committee  was  appointed 
by  him  in  which  both  parties  were  fairly  represented. 
It   included   all    the   bishops,  eight   archdeacons,   and 

'  Ellis,  Orig.  Letters,  III.  iii.  196-202. 


1 86  ECCLESIA  ANGLICANA. 

CHAP,  seventeen  doctors.  The  important  book  st3'led  tlie 
^^"-  .  "  Institution  of  a  Christian  Man,"  and  in  after  years 
known  as  the  "  Bishops'  Book,"  was  the  production  of 
this  committee.  While  this  publication  was  acceptable 
to  the  conservative  party,  it  was  regarded  by  the  most 
respectable  representatives  of  the  New  Learning  as 
carrying  the  Reformation  as  far  as  could  be  desired, 
and  Latimer  expressed  a  hope  when  it  was  finished 
"  that  we  shall  not  need  to  have  any  more  such  doings." 
The  "  Institution  "  was  an  exposition  of  the  Apostles' 
Creed,  the  Seven  Sacraments,  the  Ten  Commandments, 
the  Pater  Noster,  the  Ave  Maria,  the  doctrine  of 
Justification,  and  the  doctrine  of  Purgatory.  In  the 
exposition  of  the  Creed  the  sectarian  view  of  the  Church 
is  indirectly  disparaged  by  the  statement  that  the 
visible  Church  consists  of  all  baptized  persons,  bad  and 
good.  Bishops  are  treated  rather  as  superior  members 
of  the  priesthood  than  as  belonging  to  a  distinct  grade, 
but  the  spiritual  powers  of  the  clergy  are  declared 
to  be  inherited  from  Christ  and  the  Apostles.  The 
section  which  treats  of  the  sacraments  declares  that 
"  there  is  a  difference  in  necessity  and  dignity  "  be- 
tween the  three  sacraments  of  Baptism,  Penance,  and 
the  Altar,  and  those  of  Matrimony,  Confirmation,  Orders, 
and  Extreme  Unction.  The  superiority  of  the  former 
lies  in  their  being  instituted  by  the  Saviour  Himself, 
as  absolutely  necessary  for  salvation.  But  the  four 
others  worthily  have  "  the  name  and  dignity  of  sacra- 
ments." The  Ave  Maria  is  declared  to  be  not  a  prayer, 
but  "  a  hymn,  laud,  and  praise."  The  sections  on  Justi- 
fication and  Purgatory  are  taken  from  the  Ten  Articles. 
The  "  Institution  "  was  received  with  satisfaction  by 
the  king,  and  was  issued  by  the  royal  printer  in  1537- 
More  royal       The  new  exposition  of  faith  w^as  followed,  like  the 


HENRY  VIII.  187 

Articles,  by  a  "batcli  of  royal  "  Injuncfions."  John  chap, 
Rogers,  writing  under  the  pseudonym  of  Matthew,  had  .  ^"^1. 
lately  published  an  English  Bible  compiled  fiom  the  "injimc- 
translations  of  Tyndale  and  Coverdale.  Cranmer  ap-A.D.  isss. 
proved  of  this  traQslation,  and  had  petitioned  for  a  licence 
for  "  Matthew's  Bible,"  pending  the  completion  of  the 
"  Great  Bible  "  by  himself  and  his  fellow-commissioners.-^ 
The  new  "Injunctions  "  introduced  this  work  into  the 
churches.  It  was  enjoined  that  a  copy  of  the  Bible 
should  be  set  up  in  a  convenient  place  in  each  church,  The  open 
the  parson  and  parishioners  sharing  the  charges  of 
purchase,  and  that  every  man  should  be  "  provoked  to 
read  the  same  as  the  lively  Word  of  God."  Readers 
were  to  avoid  all  contention  and  altercation  as  to  the 
interpretation,  and  refer  "  the  explication  of  obscure 
places  to  men  of  higher  judgment  in  Scripture."  This 
last  proviso  was  not  easily  enforced,  and  turbulent  and 
fanatical  persons  soon  began  to  use  the  "  open  Bible  " 
in  the  cause  of  disorder.  Bishop  Bonner  declares  that, 
having  set  up  six  Bibles  in  St.  Paul's  with  all  due 
admonitions,  he  was  obliged  soon  afterwards  to  remove 
them,  so  intolerable  was  the  irreverence  and  clamour  of 
those  who  came  to  study  them.  The  "Injunctions"  also 
give  some  directions  about  images  and  relics  which 
imply  a  less  liberal  view  of  such  accessories  of  worship 
than  was  expressed  in  the  Ten  Articles.  The  exposure 
of  many  monkish  impostures  by  the  recent  visitation, 

'  In  1530  Henry  had  conferred  -nith  an  assembly  of  learned  university  men  as 
to  the  propriety  of  publishing  an  English  Bible.  The  assombly  decided  that  it 
would  be  better  to  defer  such  publication,  because  of  "  the  malignity  of  the  present 
time  "and  "the  inclination  of  the  people  to  erroneous  opinions."  Convocation, 
however,  in  December,  1534,  petitioned  the  king  "that  the  Scriptures  should  be 
translated  into  the  vulgar  tongue  by  some  honest  and  learned  men,  to  be  nominated 
by  the  king,  and  to  be  delivered  to  the  people  according  to  their  learning."  What 
reply  Henry  made  is  not  known,  but  Cranmer  is  found  shortly  afterwards  dividing 
the  Bible  among  a  committee  of  learned  divines  for  the  purpose  of  translation. 


1 88  ECCLESIA   ANGLIC  AN  A. 

CHAP,  and  Henry's  desire  to  exculpate  himself  for  the  spoliation 
-Zl^  of  Becket's  shrine,  are  two  sufficient  reasons  for  this 
change  of  opinion.  The  "  offering  of  money,  candles, 
or  tapers  to  images  or  relics,  and  kissing  or  licking  the 
same,"  are  deprecated  in  these  "  Injunctions,"  as  things 
"tending  to  idolatry  and  superstition;"  all  images 
that  have  received  such  marks  of  respect  are  to  be 
taken  down,  and,  with  respect  to  those  that  are  left, 
parishioners  are  to  be  warned  that  they  are  only- 
tolerated  "  as  the  books  of  unlearned  men  that  cannot 
know  letters." 
The  depu-  It  was  whilc  Henry  was  in  this  mind  that  the  Pro- 
foreigTiPro-  tcstants  made  another  attempt  to  foist  the  "Confession  of 
A.D^i538.  Augsburg  "  on  the  Church  of  England.  A  deputation 
of  Lutherans  arrived  in  England  this  summer  (1538), 
and  the  king  allowed  them  to  hold  a  conference  with 
Cranmer  and  the  liberal  bishops.  But  all  hope  of  a 
concordat  between  the  two  systems  was  at  an  end  when 
the  foreigners  had  the  boldness  to  draw  up  a  paper 
condemning  certain  practices  in  the  English  Church  as 
abuses  which  must  needs  be  removed.  Communion  in 
one  kind,  private  masses,  and  clerical  celibacy  were  the 
abuses  specified.  Henry  held  pronounced  views  on  all 
these  subjects;  and  on  one  of  them  at  least  Cranmer 
should  have  been  conservative,  since  only  a  year 
previously  he  had  officiated  at  the  performance  of 
twelve  hundred  masses  for  the  soul  of  Queen  Jane. 
The  king  henceforth  took  no  pains  to  conceal  his  con- 
tempt for  German  principalities  and  German  theology. 
The  Lutheran  delegates  were  assigned  such  incom- 
modious lodgings  and  treated  with  such  contumely 
that  they  thought  it  best  to  return  home.  Their  paper 
of  abuses  was  answered  in  vigorous  language  by 
Tonstal.     A  more  practical  reply  was  the  "  Act  of  Six: 


HENRY   VI  11.  189 

Articles  "  passed  in  the  next  year  to  guard  tlie  impugned  chap. 
practices  by  means  of  severe  penalties.  It  must  be  .-U^ 
remembered  that  Henry,  thouo;h  a  Eeformer,  was  no  Thekingno 

•^  ;  ^      ^  '  Protestant. 

Protestant.  He  found  it  expedient  to  league  with 
such  men  as  Cromwell  when  they  could  fill  his  ex- 
chequer with  the  spoils  of  the  monastic  houses;  but 
the  basis  of  such  union  was  throughout  worldly  interest, 
not  religious  sympathy.  He  could  deal  in  Erastian 
fashion  with  the  Church  when  it  was  a  question 
whether  he  or  the  Pope  should  be  supreme,  but  this 
problem  settled,  he  was  prepared  to  back  up  the  bishops 
in  their  attempts  to  enforce  order  with  all  the  zeal  of  a 
high  ecclesiastic.  In  fact,  save  when  his  greed  of 
power  or  money  pulled  him  in  the  opposite  direction, 
Henry  was  a  Catholic,  of  a  pronounced  type.  Like 
almost  all  religionists  of  his  day.  Catholic  or  Protestant, 
he  thought  it  a  good  work  to  enforce  what  he  deemed 
orthodoxy  by  means  of  civil  punishments.  The  present 
seemed  to  Henry  a  convenient  occasion  for  repudiating, 
by  a  penal  enactment,  the  Protestant  proclivities  with 
which  not  only  foreigners,  but  even  his  own  minister 
Cromwell,  had  apparently  credited  him.  But  before 
we  describe  the  "  Act  of  Six  Articles,"  it  will  be  well  to 
glance  back  and  consider  how  the  two  great  parties  had 
hitherto  fared  with  respect  to  persecution. 

The  ultra-Reforming  party  at  the  beginning  of  this  neiig-ious 
reign  had  drawn  its  recruits  mostly  from  the  small  trades-  Scms-a" 
man  class  and  from  the  students  at  the  universities.  ^®^^°^p®^*- 
The  former  were  the   class  most  aggrieved  by  those 
charges  upon  which,  according  to  the  evil  system  of  the 
time,  many  clergymen  depended  for  a  livelihood — pro- 
bate   duties,    legacy   duties,    mortuary    fees,    and    the 
charges  in  ecclesiastical  courts.     The  latter  affected  Pro- 
testantism from  less  sordid  motives,  the  New  Learning 


I90  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

CHAP,  movement  having  drifted  into  Lutheran  ism  both  at 
'^^^  .  Oxford  and  Cambridge,  notwithstanding  the  precautions 
Hunn  and  of  AV(dsey.  As  early  as  1515  the  case  of  Eichard  Hunn, 
Protestant-  a  tailor  of  London,  had  indicated  the  anti-Church 
ism  in  5  •  g^^i^-^^^g  Qf  lY^Q  lower  and  middle  class.  Hunn  had 
defrauded  the  clergyman  of  his  parish  of  a  mortuary 
fee,  and  was  sued  in  the  usual  way  in  the  Bishop  of 
London's  court.  He  proceeded  to  stir  up  an  agitation, 
and  was  foolish  enough  to  attempt  a  cross  action  on 
the  ground  that  the  spiritual  court  was  of  foreign 
origin,  and  that  a  prcemunire  had  therefore  been  incurred 
by  his  creditor.  He  not  only  lost  his  suits,  but  was 
sentenced  by  the  bishop  to  imprisonment  in  the 
Lollards'  Tower  for  the  heretical  and  irreverent  expres- 
sions which  he  had  used  in  haranguing  the  populace. 
Disgusted  by  his  disgrace  and  pecuniary  losses,  he 
expressed  a  determination  to  commit  suicide,  and  was 
found  hanging  from  a  beam  of  the  prison  chamber. 
There  appears  to  be  little  doubt  that  he  died  by  his 
own  hand  ;  so  embittered,  however,  were  the  London 
tradesmen  against  the  clergy,  that  a  jury  of  this  class 
brou2:ht  in  a  verdict  of  wilful  murder  against  the 
bishop's  chancellor.  Dr.  Horsey,  and  the  officers  in 
charge  of  Hunn.  Fortunately,  the  matter  was 
thoroughly  sifted  in  Parliament,  and  the  Attorney- 
General  made  a  public  acknowledgment  that  the 
accused  were  absolutely  guiltless.^  This  did  not  prevent 
the  ultra-Protestant  party  from  perpetuating  the 
charge,  and  in  Foxe,  of  course,  Hunn  figures  as  a 
martyr.  Numerous  other  illustrations  of  the  bad 
feeling  engendered  by  these  clerical  exactions  might  be 
adduced.  The  pretext  was  taken  away  when,  in  1529, 
Parliament   reformed    the    system   of  payments,   con- 

'  See  More's  Works,  p.  297. 


HENRY   VIII.  191 

siderably  to  the  detriment  of  the  clerical  body.  Never- 
theless the  clergy  were  still  disliked  and  distrusted,  and 
the  lower  classes  frequently  turned  a  ready  ear  to  the 
preaching  of  the  foreign  Anabaptists.  These  sectaries 
had  been  expelled  from  the  Continent  for  their  violence 
and  profanity.  They  had  preached  sedition  and  carnage, 
and  had  formed  a  scheme  for  burning  the  city  of  Leyden 
to  the  ground.  Their  religion  chiefly  consisted  in 
denouncing,  as  devised  of  the  devil,  all  those  means  of 
grace  in  which  Christians  had  hitherto  found  comfort. 
It  need  scarcely  be  said  that  Henry  was  not  the  man  -wTiy  uitra- 
to  sympathize  with  this  form  of  the  New  Learning.  we°re^ 
Motives  of  expediency  had,  however,  compelled  him  to  from\*534 
delay  suppressing  it.  His  attachment  to  Anne  Boleyn  *°  ^^^^• 
was  the  influence  which  first  secured  concessions  to  the 
party  of  disorder.  Further  concessions  were  made 
when  it  became  necessary  to  rescue  the  attack  on  the 
monasteries  from  its  wide-spread  unpoj^ularity.  Crom- 
well and  other  exponents  of  ultra-Protestant  principles 
were  now  allowed  to  inveigh,  with  gross  irreverence, 
against  the  established  religious  sj^stem.  Tracts  and 
pamphlets  of  the  most  obscene  and  irreligious  character 
were  circulated  for  the  purpose  of  disparaging  the 
monastic  system.  Blasphemous  plays,  in  which  the 
Eucharist  was  parodied,  were  acted  in  the  churches. 
The  lawlessness  and  unscrupulous  malignity  of  the 
sectarian  party  were  allowed  free  play  at  this  time, 
and  the  only  persons  who  suffered  for  their  religious 
opinions  were  i^uch  of  the  conservative  party  as  repu- 
diated the  king's  supremacy. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  period  preceding  Cromwell's 
regime  had  illustrated  the  real  tendeiic}''  of  the  king's 
religious  opinions.  Wolsey  had  dealt  leniently  with 
the  students  who  affected  Lutheran  sentiments  at  the  But  perse- 


CHAP. 


cuted  from 


192  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

■universities.    The  pamphlets  of  the  new  religionists  were 
"^^"-       publicly  burnt,  but  their  readers  M^ere  only  forced  to 
attend  at  the  sacrifice  with  faggots  on  their  shoulders,  or 
1534*°        to  wear  the  semblance  of  a  faggot  on  their  dress  for  some 
specified  period.    But  few  men  of  that  day  were  capable 
of  Wolsey's  moderation.     The  cardinal  was  accused  of 
repressing  proceedings  against  heretics,  and  the  "  Eefor- 
mation  Parliament  "  of  1529  taunted  the  bishops  with 
inability  to  suppress  religious  dissension.     The  king's 
appointment  of  More  to  the  office  of  Chancellor  inaugu- 
rated a   reign    of    persecution,  and    the  ancient  laws 
against  heresy  were  working  briskly  from  1529  to  1534. 
Bilney,  a  gloomy  and  half-crazed  Puritan  whom  Wolsey 
had   persuaded   to    recant,    disowned   his    recantation, 
and   began  preaching   against  the  Church  system  in 
Norfolk.     He  was  burnt  in  the  market-place  of  Norwich 
in  1531.    Bayfield,  a  monk  of  Bury,  suffered  in  the  same 
year  for  persistently  circulating  the  prohibited  litera- 
ture of  Protestantism.     Hilton,  a  curate  of  Maidstone, 
had  been  burnt  on  the  same  charge  in  1530.     Tewkes- 
bury, a  leatherseller,  and  Bainham,  a  gentleman  of  the 
Middle  Temple,  were  burned  at  Smithfield.     The  latter 
charged  More  with  his  death,  and  denounced  him  as  act- 
ing both  as  accuser  and  judge.     To  More,  too,  must  be 
attached  the  disgrace  of  John  Fry th's  execution  in  July, 
1533.     Fryth  was  one  of  the  scholars  whom  Wolsey 
imported  to  Cardinal  College  from  the  sister  university. 
He  had  got  into  trouble  for  Lutheran  opinions,   and 
deemed  it  advisable  to  retire  to  Germany.     From  this 
harbour  of  refuge  he  promulgated  treatises  in  answer 
to  More's  "  Supplication ""'  and  the  similar  productions  by 
Bishop  Fisher,  and  Eastall  More's  brother-in-law.     He 
was  unwise  enough  to  return  to  England.     More  made 


HENRY   VIII.  193 

searcli  for  him,  and  he  soon  found  himself  in  the  Tower.  chap. 
He  was  decoyed  into  the  perilous  region  of  sacramental  _I!iiL. 
controversy  by  More's  agents,  and  was  found  to  hold 
lax  opinions  on  the  dogma  of  transubstantiation,  and  to 
deny  that  the  consecrated  elements  might  be  worshipped. 
Cranmer  and  the  Bishop  of  London  laboured  in  vain  to 
convert  him.  By  the  latter  he  was  delivered  to  the 
secular  arm,  together  with  Andrew,  a  tailor  of  similar 
opinions,  and  both  were  burnt  at  Smithfield  a  few  days 
after  Anne  Boleyn's  coronation. 

The  suspension  of  hostilities  was  inaugurated  by  an  Tie  sop  to 
Act   regulating  proceedings    against   heretics  (Murch,  testant 
1534).    In  deference  to  the  party  now  in  the  ascendant,  ^^^*^°^- 
it  was  enacted  that  the  bishops  should  no  longer  be 
allowed  to  arrest  suspected  persons  ex  officio.     Present- 
ments were  to  be  made  in  the  first  place  before  justices 
of  the  peace,  and  the  depositions  of  at  least  two  wit- 
nesses were  required.     The  justices,  if   satisfied  that 
there  was  ground  for  accusation,  were  to  hand  over  the 
case  to  the  ordinary,  who  was  to  try  it  in  public  court. 
For  condemnation  a  royal  writ  de  hceretico  comhurendo 
was  required.     In  view  of  the  constitutional  changes 
now  in   contemplation,  the  Act  also  orders  that  none 
shall  be  deemed   a  heretic  for  speaking  against  papal 
laws  or  canons.     The  martyrs  of  the  next  five  years  Romanists 
were  according!}',  as  we  observed  before,  the  men  of  the  o^i^gjf. 
opposite  school,  such  as  could  not  accept  the  "  Act  of  ferers  from 
Supremacy,"  or  such  as  resented  the  king's  attack  on  November, 

.  .  .  153S 

the  monasteries.  The  winter  succeeding  the  visit  of 
the  foreigners  gave  tokens  of  a  change  of  policy.  A 
turbulent  Zuinglian,  John  Nicholson,  alias  Lambert, 
was  condemned  by  Cranmer  for  denying  tlje  Real 
Presence.  He  appealed  to  the  king,  who  willingly 
undertook   to  try  the  case,  and  summoned  the  whole 

0 


194  ECCLESIA  ANGLICANA. 

CHAP,  peerage  to  witness  the  proceedings.  The  wretched 
^  "^'  Lambert,  who  appears  to  have  hoped  to  set  the  king 
and  bishops  at  variance,  was  bullied  and  browbeaten 
by  the  former  and  confuted  by  the  latter.  At  the  close 
of  the  day  he  was  sentenced  to  death  by  the  king,  and 
Cromwell  had  to  read  the  sentence  (Nov.  1538). 

In  1539  the  king  was  assured  that  the  Protestant 
faction  had  served  his  turn  sufficiently,  and  that  his 
hands  were  free  for  an  attack  on  the  party  of  disorder. 
He  proposed  to  stem  the  tide  of  undisciplined  Pro- 
testantism by  a  bulwark  of  dogma,  based  to  all  ap- 
pearance on  decisions  in  the  House  of  Lords  and  in 
Convocation.  These  bodies  were  accordingly  appealed 
to  for  an  opinion  on  certain  theological  questions 
whereon  the  Protestant  doctors  had  spoken  plainly. 
The  Six  Ecally  they  were  to  give  an  authoritative  sanction  to 
Henry's  foregone  conclusions,  which  he  could  use  here- 
after as  a  pretext  for  persecution.  The  questions  were 
six  in  number.  The  Convocation  of  Canterbury  found 
little  difficulty  in  giving  the  desired  response,  Latimer, 
Shaxton,  Crome,  and  Taylor  being  the  only  dissentients. 
Cranmer  appears  to  have  confined  his  opposition  to  the 
House  of  Lords,  where  he  spoke  strongly  for  a  time 
aocainst  some  of  the  doofmas  under  consideration. 
Assurances  were  given  him  by  the  king  which  in- 
duced him  to  abandon  this  course;  he  henceforth 
attended  in  the  House,  but  refrained  from  voting. 
Other  prelates  appear  to  have  acted  in  the  same  way : 
the  lay  lords  mostly  approved  of  the  dogmas.^     The 

'  See  the  letter  from  one  of  the  temporal  peers  preserved  in  Strype's  Cran- 
mer, vol.  ii.  p.  743,  and  quoted  by  Mr.  Froude :  "Notwithstanding  my  Lord 
Canterbury,  my  Lord  of  Ely,  my  Lord  of  Salisbury,  my  Lords  of  Worcester, 
Rochester,  and  S.  David's  defended  the  contrary  long  time,  yet  finally  his  High- 
ness confounded  them  all  with  God's  learning.  .  .  .  We  of  the  temporally  have 
been  all  of  one  opinion,  and  my  Lord  Chancellor  and  my  Lord  Privy  Seal  as  good 
as  we  can  desire.     My  Lord  of  Canterbury  and  all  the  bishops  have  given  over 


Articles  of 
1539. 


HENRY   VI  11.  195 

opinion  thus  secured  in  Convocation  and  the  House  chap. 
of  Lords  was  embodied  in  a  "  Statute  of  Six  Articles,"  _Ii!Ii_ 
which  was  drawn  up  by  Henry  himself,  and  to  which 
he  attached  a  bill  of  pains  and  penalties.  The  statute 
ruled  as  follows:  (1)  That  in  the  Eucharist  there 
remains  no  other  substance  after  consecration  but 
Christ's  natural  body;  (2)  That  Communion  in  both 
kinds  is  not  necessary  ad  salutem ;  (3)  That  priests 
may  not  marry ;  (4)  That  vows  of  chastity  may  not 
be  disowned ;  (5)  That  the  continuance  of  private 
masses  is  advisable,  meet,  and  necessary;  (6)  That 
auricular  confession  is  expedient.  Such  as  taught,  dis- 
puted, or  even  believed  contrary  to  Article  I.  were 
doomed  b}^  Henry  to  death  by  burning.  Disobeying 
or  impugning  any  of  the  five  other  Articles  entailed 
forfeiture  of  goods,  and  if  a  second  offence,  the  death 
of  a  felon.  Those  who  did  not  attend  confession  and 
mass  were  to  be  considered  to  have  infringed  the 
Articles.  All  marriages  hitherto  contracted  by  priests 
were  declared  void ;  the  priest  who  should  retain  bis 
wife  after  a  certain  fixed  day  was  to  suffer  as  a  felon. 

Such  were  the  tender  mercies  of  Henry  YIII.  when 
circumstances  permitted  him  to  view  Protestantism 
from  a  theological  and  not  a  political  standpoint. 
Heresy  was  for  the  first  time  made  an  offence  which 
abjuration  could  not  cancel,  and  the  noisy  disputants 
who  had  inveighed  so  incessantly  against  the  mediaeval 
view  of  the  Eucharist  were  suddenly  gagged  by  the 
very  sovereign  whose  ecclesiastical  jurisdiction  they 
had  always  magnified.  Yet  it  is  but  fair  to  Henry  to 
acknowledge  both  that  a  severe  statute  was  necessary 
to  suppress  these  indecent  cavillings,  and  that  in  effect 
the  Act  was  u^^ed  mainly  as  a  deterrent.    The  Protestants 

their  opinions,  and  come  in  to  us,  save  Salisbury,  who  yet  continueth  a  lewd 
fool." 


196 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


Fall  of 
Crom-weU. 
AD.  1540. 


called  it  "  The  whip  with  six  strings,"  or  the  "  bloody 
Act  of  Six  Articles."  But  as  a  fact  comparatively  few 
persons  suflfered  its  formidable  penalties.  A  number  of 
turbulent  Protestants  were  indeed  incarcerated,  but 
when  this  severity  had  made  sufficient  sensation,  they 
obtained  a  pardon  by  a  roj'al  proclamation.  Only 
twenty-eight  Protestants  suffered  the  extreme  penalty 
during  the  eight  remaining  years  of  the  reign,  and 
many  of  these  victims  were  condemned  under  other 
statutes.  All  that  Henry  really  wished  was  that  the 
party  of  disorder  should  be  silenced,  and  that  the 
reform  of  the  Church  should  be  left  in  his  own  hands. 

Two  of  the  Eeforming  prelates,  Latimer  and  Shaxton, 
the  Bishops  of  Worcester  and  Salisbury,  confessed  their 
inability  to  accept  the  Six  Articles,  and  resigned  their 
bishoprics.  They  were  quartered  on  two  other  bishojis, 
and  remained  till  the  end  of  the  reign  in  a  sort  of 
nominal  imprisonment.  Cranmer's  chief  ground  of 
objection  was  the  fact  that  he  was  himself  a  married 
man.  He  was  assured  by  Cromwell  that  the  king 
would  not  allow  him  to  be  molested.  Nevertheless,  he 
thought  it  wise  to  despatch  Madam  Cranmer  to  Calais 
in  haste,  a  proceeding  which  seems  to  have  caused 
Henry  some  amusement. 

The  triumph  of  the  conservative  party  boded  ill  for 
the  statesman  who  had  made  Protestantism  an  engine 
of  spoliatiun  and  sacrilegious  outrage.  It  was  no 
uncommon  thing  in  this  period  for  a  great  minister 
to  lose  life  itself  when  he  lost  his  influence  with  the 
king.  In  Cromwell's  case  the  fate  was  well  earned. 
By  all  classes  he  appears  to  have  been  hated.  The 
clergy  and  the  many  lay  adherents  of  the  Old  Learning 
had  had  their  convictions  outraged  by  his  profanity  ; 
the  nobles  resented  the  arrogance  of  an  insolent  up- 


HENRY   VI I  I.  197 

start ;  the  lower  orders  knew  that  the  anther  of  the      chap. 
"  visitation  "  scheme  had  in  suppressing  the  monks  de-     — ^_L- 
prived  them  of  their  best  friends.     It  only  remained  for 
Cromwell  to  lose  Henry's  favour,  and  his  ruin  would 
be  certain.     The  fall  of  the  favourite  was  imminent  in 
1539.     Cromwell   had  quite  misinterpreted   the  theo- 
logical opinions  of  the  king,  and  had  tried  to  identify 
him  with  the  Protestants.     Besides  this  impolicy,  he 
had  been  unfortunate  in   his  financial  schemes.     The 
plunder   of   the    monasteries    might    well    have    been 
used  to  lighten  the  burden  of  taxation.     But  Cromwell 
had  purchased  the  sympathy  of  spendthrift  courtiers 
at   such  a  price   that   the   royal   treasury  was   again 
running  dry,  and  yet  larger  subsidies  had  to  be  de- 
manded.   The  minister's  scheme  for  marrying  Henry  to 
Anne  of  Cleves  sealed  his  fate.     Still  misunderstanding 
the  tendency  of  the  king's  religious  opinions,  Cromwell 
had  devised  this  marriage  to  effect  an  alliance  between 
England  and  the  Protestant  Powers  of  the  Continent. 
Henry  soon  learnt  to  loathe  his  Dutch  bride,  and  his 
anger  against  the  promoter  of  the  marriage  appears  to 
have  been  increased  by  some  revelation  of  Cromwell's 
political  negotiations.    The  Duke  of  Norfolk,  the  leader 
of  the  Catholic  party,  was  allowed,  if  not  instigated,  to 
attaint  Cromwell  with  high  treason.     Bribery,  pecu- 
lation, heresy,  assumption    of   exorbitant    power,   and 
menaces  against  the  king  and  nobility  were  the  definite 
charges  mentioned  in  the  act  of  attainder.     Cranmer 
ventured  a  half-hearted  appeal  on  Cromwell's  behalf, 
but  the  attainder  was  carried  with  general  acclamation. 
The  fallen  favourite  was  beheaded  in  July,  1540. 

The  death  of  Cromwell  was  succeeded  by  attainders  Hencefor- 
against  other  active  members  of  the  Protestant  party.  "^^'^'^^0*11 
In  fact,  the  extreme  men  of  the  contending  schools  now  suffer. 


198  ECCLESIA  ANGLICANA. 

CHAP,  found  themselves  united  in  a  common  fate.  On  the 
— ^-L-  same  day  that  three  Lutherans — Barnes,  Gerard,  and 
Jerome — were  doomed  to  death  by  burning,  three  deniers 
of  the  king's  supremacy  were  sentenced  to  be  hanged, 
drawn,  and  quartered.  Four  more  Protestants  suffered 
under  the  "  Six  Articles  Act"  in  May  and  June,  and  again 
seven  Eomanists  under  the  supremacy  laws  in  August. 
Of  all  the  Eoman  party  none  had  irritated  Henry  so 
much  as  his  cousin,  Reginald  Pole,  who  from  his  retreat 
in  Italy  had  bitterly  denounced  the  royal  proceedings 
in  the  matters  of  the  divorce,  the  separation  from  Rome, 
and  the  execution  of  More  and  Fisher.  The  Pope  had 
rewarded  Pole  with  promotion  to  the  cardinalate ; 
Henry  had  harmlessly  revenged  himself  by  attainting 
the  refugee  as  a  traitor.  In  May,  1540,  a  victim  was 
found  to  expiate  the  offence  with  blood,  and  Pole's 
mother,  the  aged  Countess  of  Salisbury,  was  sent  to 
the  block. 

By  such  barbarities  were  the  confines    determined 

within  which  the  Reformation  was  to  make  its  way. 

The  papists  being  prohibited  from  impugning  the  royal 

supremacy,  and  the  Protestants  from  cavilling  at  the 

sacraments,    an   orderly   readjustment   of  the    Church 

could  be  continued  by  the  king  and  Convocation. 

But  an  The  last  important  measures  in  connection  with  this 

iiSS^a-     work  had  been  the  publication  of  the   "  Institution," 

tion  is  con-   ^^^  ^j^g  Setting  up  of  "  Matthew's  Bible  "  in  the  churches. 

tinued.  '^     ■•■ 

The  "  Great  Bible,"  or  "  Cranmer's  Bible,"  had  since 
been  published,  and  attained  a  large  circulation.  But, 
as  we  have  before  noticed,  the  insubordinate  spirit  of 
the  ultra-Protestant  party  made  these  Bible  translations 
a  bane  rather  than  a  blesbing.  An  Act  of  1543,  which 
suppressed  the  profane  plays  and  ballads  wherewith 
the  ultra-Protestants  had  aspersed  the  established  re- 


HENRY   VIII .  199 

ligions  system,  cliecked  also  the  reading  of  the  Bible. 
For  the  present,  none  were  to  be  allowed  to  read 
Scripture  under  the  degree  of  gentleman  and  gentle- 
woman. 

The  "  Necessary  Erudition  of  any  Christian  Man "  t^.^  ^^ 
was  now  published  to  take  the  place  of  the  "  Institu-  Book." 

^  .  „      ,  -r        May,  1543. 

tion,"  The  "  Erudition "  was  a  review  of  the  "  in- 
stitution," and  was  effected  by  a  committee  of  divines 
working  under  the  supervision  of  the  king  and  Cranmer. 
It  had  been  provided  by  Act  of  Parliament  that  the 
result  of  their  labours  should  be  "  believed  and  ac- 
cepted "  by  all  the  king's  subjects.  Though  begun  in 
1540,  the  "Erudition"  was  not  completed  till  May, 
1543.  The  king  had  carefully  superintended  the  com- 
position of  this  work,  and  himself  written  a  preface  to 
it.  Hence  it  was  called  the  "  King's  Book ; "  the  "  In- 
stitution," to  which  the  king  had  merely  given  assent, 
being  generally  known  as  the  "  Bishops'  Book." 

The  "Erudition"  may  be  considered  reactionary  in 
character,  inasmuch  as  it  insists  on  the  dogma  of  tran- 
substantiation.  In  other  respects  it  appears  to  deviate 
little  from  the  lines  of  the  "Institution."  The  cult 
of  saints,  concerning  which  the  "  Institution  "  had  been 
altogether  silent,  is  here  made  the  text  for  a  depreca- 
tion of  several  superstitious  usages.  There  is  a  nearer 
approach  to  the  Lutheran  doctrine  of  justification  by 
faith  only.  The  king's  ecclesiastical  supremacy  is 
stated  in  plainer  language;  but  the  doctrine  of  the 
Apostolical  succession,  whereon  the  "  Institution  "  had 
said  little,  is  also  fully  expounded.  This  feature  is  the 
more  remarkable  in  that  Cranmer's  deference  to  royalty 
had  by  this  time  degenerated  almost  into  Erastianism. 
The  correspondence  between  the  archbishop  and  the 
committee   who    produced    the   "  Erudition "    is    still 


200 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


CHAP. 
VIII. 


Purgation 
of  devo- 
tional 
Offices. 
A.D.  1543. 


extant,  and  it  is  difficult  to  credit  him  with  a  right 
view  of  Huly  Orders  at  this  period  of  his  career.  The 
"Institution"  had  not  been  submitted  to  Convocation 
for  approval ;  the  "  Erudition  "  was.  Here,  however,  as 
in  other  cases,  Henry  made  a  show  of  consulting  the 
Church's  representatives,  while  really  asking  them 
to  endorse  the  opinions  of  Cranmer  and  a  few  favourite 
divines. 

In  February,  1543,  the  king  signified  his  wish  for 
a  reform  of  missals,  antiphoners,  and  portuses.  He 
desired  that  the  Pope's  name  should  be  expunged  from 
these,  and  that  they  should  be  purged  of  "  all  apo- 
cryphas,  feigned  legends,  superstitious  orations,  collects, 
versicles,  and  responses,"  as  \v^ell  as  "  names  of  saints 
which  be  not  mentioned  in  the  Scripture  or  authentical 
doctors."  He  selected  two  members  of  the  Upper 
Houses  (the  Bishops  of  Salisbury  and  Ely)  and  three 
of  the  Lower  to  form  a  committee  to  execute  this  work. 
It  is  not  known  how  far  these  divines  had  proceeded 
with  their  task  before  the  death  of  Henry.  They  may 
be  supposed,  however,  to  have  paved  the  way  for  the 
larger  committee  of  the  next  reign,  which  brought  out 
EngrUsh       the  first  English  Prayer-book.      Meantime  an  English 

Litany  and  ,       .  .  . 

"King's      translation  of  the  "Procession,"  or  Litany  of  the  Use  of 
A.D.  Sarum,  was  prepared  by   Cranmer   at   the   suggestion 

1644-46.  Q^  ^1^^  king,  with  expurgations,  additions,  and  amend- 
ments (1544).  The  primate's  production  is  practically 
our  present  Litany.  It  differs  only  in  containing  three 
petitions  to  the  Virgin  and  saints,  and  a  deprecation  of 
"the  Bishop  of  Rome  and  his  detestable  enormities." 
The  popularity  of  the  translated  Litany  suggested  to 
Henry  the  publication  of  an  authorized  English 
"  Primer,"  or  book  of  devotional  Offices,  and  with  this 
work  Cranmer  was  equally  successful.    Primers  explain- 


HENRY   VI IL  20I 

ing  the  Creed,  the  Lord's  Prayer,  and  the  Ten  Command-  chap. 
ments  may  be  traced  back  to  Saxon  times ;  and  one  such  _I^ 
manual  of  devotion,  including  an  exposition  of  the 
Seven  Works  of  Mercy  and  the  Seven  Sacraments,  had 
been  in  common  use  under  the  title  "  The  Prymer " 
ever  since  the  thirteenth  century.  With  the  dawn  of 
Eeformation  had  come  Primers  of  a  new  type.  The 
"  Primer  "  of  George  Jaye  had  been  one  of  the  Protestant 
publications  which  had  fallen  under  More's  ban.  Mar- 
shall's "Primer,"  published  in  1535,  was  a  work  which 
obtained  a  wide  circulation,  though  Convocation  took 
measures  for  suppressing  it.  This  work  is  of  a  homiletio 
as  well  as  devotional  character.  It  censures  the  super- 
stitions connected  with  the  cult  of  images,  and  the 
practice  of  basing  appeals  to  the  Almighty  on  the  merits 
of  saints.  It  speaks  of  the  bishops  of  Eome  as  "  cursed 
and  blasphemous."  A  Primer  of  a  more  temperate  tone 
had  been  published  in  1539  by  Hilsey,  Bishop  of 
Rochester,  at  the  instigation  of  Cromwell.  It  follows 
three  main  divisions,  Faith,  Prayer,  and  Works.  It 
seems  to  have  been  too  Protestant  in  character  to  please 
the  king.  The  Primer  now  set  forth  in  1545  "by  the 
king's  majesty  and  his  clergy  to  be  taught,  learned, 
and  read,  and  none  other  to  be  used  throughout  his 
dominions,"  was  really  compiled  and  translated  by 
Cranmer.  It  includes  the  prayers  for  matins,  even- 
song, and  compline,  the  Dirige,  the  new  English 
Litany,  and  some  excellent  private  prayers  and  graces. 
"  If  the  reader,"  says  Dean  Hook,  "  will  take  the 
trouble  of  comparing  this  with  the  '  Salisbury  Primer,' 
he  will,  after  making  all  allowances  for  the  improved 
state  of  our  language  during  the  interval,  be  deeply 
impressed  with  the  archbishop's  superiority  as  a 
writer." 


202  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

CHAP.  Order  and  uniformity  were  principles  dear  to  Henry, 

VI"-  and  he  proposed  to  supplement  the  authorized  Primer 
The  "Book  HOW  published,  and  the  authorized  Prayer-book  yet  in 
ne?"™^  the  hands  of  the  commission,  with  an  authorized  book 
of  sermons.  The  ignorance  and  unconscious  heterodoxy 
of  many  of  the  clergy  had  long  suggested  the  propriety 
of  such  a  work.  Cranmer  accordingly  busied  himself 
with  the  preparation  of  the  "  Book  of  Homilies  "  which 
was  published  shortly  after  Edward's  accession.  The 
twelve  sermons  included  in  this  work  still  claim  a 
sanction  from  the  thirty-fifth  of  our  Thirty-Nine 
Articles,  which  declares  that  both  the  former  and  the 
latter  "  Book  of  Homilies  "  "  contain  a  godly  and  whole- 
some doctrine."  It  is  impossible  to  speak  with  certainty 
as  to  the  authorship  of  the  several  Homilies.  Three  of 
them,  however,  may  reasonably  be  regarded  as  Cranmer's 
own  composition,  viz.  those  entitled  "  Of  the  Salvation 
of  Mankind,"  "  A  Short  Declaration  of  the  True  and 
Lively  Christian  Faith,"  "  Of  Good  Works  annexed 
unto  Faith."  That  which  treats  "  Of  the  Misery  of 
Mankind  "  is  by  Bishop  Bonner. 


EDWARD    VI.  203 


CHAPTER  IX. 
lEtibjarti  Vk. 

A.D.    1547-1553. 

Religious  status — The  boding  rupture — Hatred  of  Cranmer— Henry's  will— Ultra- 
Reformers  in  the  ascendant — The  Protector  plunders  the  Church — Cranmer's 
indifference — Not  attributable  to  Protestant  convictions— But  to  moral  infirmity 
— The  Reformation  in  ill  odour— Cranmer's  licences  and  letters  patent — Was 
Cranmer  an  Erastian  ? — Appropriation  of  chantries — Violence  of  the  Reformers 
— The  visitation  of  dioceses — Desecration  of  ornaments — Enforcement  of  the 
"First  Book  of  Homilies" — Gardiner's  brave  resistance — He  is  imprisoned  and 
deprived — Poynet,  his  successor — Bishop  Bonner — Influx  of  foreign  Protestants^ 
Their  unsympathetic  attitude— The  Eucharistic  controversy— Communion  in 
both  kinds — The  Latin- English  missal — The  "  First  Prayer-book  of  Edward  VI." 
— The  English  ordinal — Clerical  celibacy — Survival  of  prejudices— Fasting  not 
meritorious — Disputes  on  the  Sacramental  Presence — Unfairness  of  the  Reform- 
ing champions — The  Old  Learning  proscribed— Maladministration  of  sees, 
livings,  and  university  revenues — Political  mismanagement — Revolt  against  the 
new  religion — Lamentations  of  Latimer — Maladministrations  continued  by 
Northumberland— "Injunctions"  against  the  ancient  ritual — Bonner  made  an 
exajuple  of — Ridley's  arbitrary  innovations — Sanctioned  by  the  Council — More 
bishops  in  prison — Attempt  to  coerce  the  Princess  Mary — Suppression  of  heretics 
— Joan  Bocher— Appointment  of  Hooper  to  Gloucester— His  Puritan  scruples — 
He  is  imprisoned  by  Cranmer  till  he  conforms— The  Forty -two  Articles— Com- 
pared with  our  "Thirty-nine  Articles  "—The  Reforming  Catechism— The 
Second  Prayer-book — Cranmer's  opinions  modified — Unfortunate  clianges  in 
Communion  Office— Fate  of  the  Second  Prayer-book— The  revisions  of  the 
Prayer-book  compared  —  Foreign  divines  still  dissatisfied  —  The  "Reformatio 
Legum  " — Commissions  of  search  for  Cliurch  property. 

The  cause  of  Eeformation  had  gained  substantial  con-  Reugious 
cessions    from   the   reign   of    Henry    VIII.,   and    the  status, 
changes  had  been  accepted  cheerfully  by  most  Eng- 
lishmen.      Subjection   to    Eome    had   been    generally 
rejected  as  a  non-essential ;  the  abuses  connected  with 


204  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

the  cult  of  images  and  commemoration  of  saints  had 
been  removed ;  an  English  Bible  was  being  circu- 
lated under  wise  limitations ;  the  Canons  and  Service 
Books  were  being  expurgated ;  indecent  cavilling  had 
been  forcibly  silenced.  With  the  exception  of  the 
suppression  of  the  monasteries,  sober-minded  persons 
of  neither  school  had  much  to  complain  of. 

The  boding:  Nevertheless,  from  the  time  of  Cromwell's  fall  a 
rupture  between  the  conservative  and  Reforming  sec- 
tions had  been  impending, — had,  in  fact,  only  been  stayed 
by  the  firmness  of  Henry  himself.  To  the  former, 
especially  to  its  leaders,  Gardiner  and  Norfolk,  Arch- 
bishop Cranmer  was  particularly  odious,  and  more  than 
one  plot  had  been  hatched  to  undermine  his  influence 
with  the  king.  London  and  Thornton,  both  discredi- 
tably connected  with  the  visitation  of  the  monasteries, 
were  employed  in  1543  to  get  up  a  case  against  the 

Hatred  of    arclibishoD  as  a  patron  of  hcretics.     Sir  John  Gostwick 

Cranmer.  ^  ■*■ 

had  accused  him  in  the  Commons  as  holding  an  un- 
orthodox view  of  the  Eucharist.  In  both  cases  the 
king  had  protected  his  favourite.  The  adverse  faction 
in  the  Privy  Council  had  menaced  him  with  more 
serious  danger  in  1545.  Eepresentation  was  made  to 
the  king  that  "  the  archbishop  with  his  learned  men 
had  so  infected  the  whole  realm  with  their  unsavoury 
doctrine,  that  these  parts  of  the  land  were  become 
abominable  heretics."  It  was  prayed  "  that  the  arch- 
bishop might  be  committed  to  the  Tower  until  he  might 
be  examined."  The  king,  on  this  occasion,  saw 
Cranmer  in  private,  and  assured  him  of  protection. 
When  the  cause  was  brought  before  him,  he  informed 
the  Council  that  the  archbishop  was  his  trusted  friend, 
and  forthwith  enforced  a  reconciliation.  The  flame 
of  discord  was  thus  kept  under,  but  not  extinguished. 


EDWARD    VI.  205 

This  feud  at  court  was  a  fair  indication  of  the  relations      chap. 
of  the  two  great  parties  throughout  England.  ^^•_ 

In    1536    Parliament   had    given    the    king    power  Henry's 
to    bequeath  the    crown  as  he  pleased.      By    Henry's  ^^ 
will  his  son  Edward,  a  precocious    boy  of  ten,    was 
named  as  his  immediate  successor ;  Mary,  the  daughter 
of  Catharine  of  Aragon,  came  next  in  succession ;   then 
Elizabeth,    the   daughter  of   Anne  Boleyn.      The  de- 
scendants of  his  younger  sister  Mary  were  placed  next ; 
then  those  of  his  elder  sister  Margaret.     In  the  Council 
of    sixteen,  nominated    by   Henry   to    govern    during 
Edward's    minority,  both   the   religious   parties   were 
represented.      The  Eeforming  section,  however,  soon  mtra- 
obtained  a  predominance  which  enabled  it  to  defy  its  ^l^^^^^ 
rival,  and  establish  a  policy  of  spoliation  and  precipitate  ascendant, 
change.      Hertford,    an   ultra-Protestant,  was   elected 
Lord  Protector.     He  procured  a  patent  for  this  ofiSce, 
by  which  he  was  enabled  to  rule  with  or  without  the 
Council,  as   he   pleased.       Two   of  the   leading    anti- 
Reformers,    Tonstal  of  Durham  and  Wriothesley  the 
chancellor,    were    soon    altogether    ousted    from     the 
Council ;  the  others  were  summoned  as  the  Protector 
thought   convenient.      Gardiner,    the   leading   j)relate 
of  the  conservative  party,  had  not  been  included  among 
Henry's  nominees.     Archbishop  Cranmer,  however,  was 
a  member  of  the  Council,  and  those  who  desired  orderly 
and  judicious  reform   may  have  hoped  to  find  in  the 
primate  a  counterpoise  to  such  unprincipled  iconoclasts 
as  the  Protector.     If  so,  they  hoped  in  vain.     Hertford,  The 
better  known  by  his  later  title  of  Duke  of  Somerset,  ^l^^aerl 
was   professedly   a    Protestant   of  the  Calvinist  type,  ^iie church. 
The  sincerity  of  his  Prutestanism  hns  been  questioned  ; 
its  utility  to  himself  during  his  Protectorate  is  open  to 
no  doubt.     Hits  first  proceeding  was  to  appropriate  five 


206 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


Cranmer's 
indiffer- 


Not  attri- 


religious  houses,  in  addition  to  the  three  which  Henry 
had  conferred  on  him.  To  provide  materials  for 
Somerset  House,  he  destroyed  the  Church  of  S.  Mary- 
le-Straud,  and  that  of  the  Knights  of  S.  John ;  and 
to  form  apartments  for  his  suite,  he  pulled  down  the 
houses  and  chapels  of  three  bishops.  Westminster 
Abbey^  recently  made  a  cathedral  church,  was  also 
threatened  with  demolition.  Dean  Benson  saved  it 
by  alienating  to  the  Protector  and  to  his  brother  a 
number  of  its  manorial  endowments.  Somerset  gave 
further  evidence  of  his  ultra-Protestant  zeal  by  a 
gratuitous  destruction  of  the  charnel  house  and 
monuments  in  S.  Paul's  Churchyard.^ 

And  Cranmer,  the  primate  of  all  England,  "  cared  for 
none  of  these  things."  The  profanity  and  peculation  of 
the  Government  roused  honest  Latimer  to  pulpit  invec- 
tives, and  Latimer's  note  was  taken  up  by  Knox,  the 
northern  Calvinist.  But  the  chief  pastor  of  the  English 
Church  regarded  her  wrongs  with  indifference.  Dis- 
creetly silent  when  Henry  sacked  the  monasteries,  he 
now  extended  his  tolerance  to  the  hypocrisy  of  Somerset, 
and  to  the  more  pronounced  Vandalism  of  Northumber- 
land. It  has  been  urged  on  his  behalf  that  Cranmer  had 
conceived  a  secret  liking  for  ultra-Protestantism  before 
the  death  of  Henry.  The  assertion  is,  however,  utterly 
void  of  foundation.  The  primate  was  sufficiently 
tainted  with  the  old  leaven  to  sing  masses  of  re- 
quiem for  Henry  and  for  Francis  I.  At  the  coronation 
of  the  boy-king  he  celebrated  the  Mass  of  the  Holy 
Ghost  with  the  usual  ritual.  It  is  possible  that  Cran- 
mer was  at  this  time  inclined  to  the  Lutheran  doctrine 
of  consubtantiation,  but  not  a  step  lower  had  he  thought 
of  going.     During  the  next  five  years  he  embraced  that 


'  See  Stow,  Survey  of  London,  p.  122  (ed.  1876). 


EDWARD    VI .  207 

view  of  a  real  but  undefinable  Presence  wliicli  is  enun-  chap. 
ciated  in  the  "  Defence  of  the  true  and  Catholic  doc-  .  ^^\  . 
trine"  of  1550,   and  in  the  Articles  of   1553.      This  Mutable 

to  ProtGs- 

view  he  probably  learnt  from  his  former  chaplain,  tantcon- 
Eidley,  who  himself  discovered  it  in  the  works  of  ^^^  ^°^^ 
John  Scotus  Erigena,  the  controversialist  of  the 
ninth  century.  Eidley,  indeed,  did  not  stop  here,  but 
became  something  very  like  a  "  sacramentary,"  or 
denier  of  sacramental  grace,  before  the  end  of  this 
reign.  But  he  did  not  go  in  Cranmer's  company.  The 
primate  was,  doubtless,  sincere  in  his  subsequent  re- 
sistance to  the  Puritan  innovations  of  Hooper ;  and  it 
is  impossible  to  suppose  that  with  iconoclasts  such  as 
Somerset  he  at  any  time  had  a  religious  sympathy. 

It  appears  that  Cranmer  was  incapacitated  by  natural  But  to 
indecision  of  character  for  executing  the  duties  of  a  infirmity, 
primate  under  such  regimes  as  the  present.     In  private 
life  he  was  amiable  and  estimable :  as  a  man  of  learn- 
ing he  ranked  high,  if  not  among  the  highest.     But  as 
primate    of   all   England,   Cranmer    was    simply    con- 
temptible.     He    had    been    promoted,   like    numerous 
prelates  before  and  since,  to  serve  a  sovereign's  whim. 
It  was  his  misfortune  to  survive  the  occasion,  and  be 
primate  when  the   Church  required  something  better 
than  a  royal  puppet  at  her  helm.     The  fire  of  religious 
animosity  had  now  broken   out;  its  flames   could  not 
but  cast   a  glare  on  the    incapacity  of   the   primate. 
Cranmer  collapsed,  and  the  Church  was    manipulated 
as  Somerset  and  Northumberland  thought  fit.     A  com- 
parison of  the  years  1547  and  1553  will  illustrate  the 
eff'ect  on  the  English  Eeformation.     When  Henry  died.  The  nefor- 
the  Eeformition    was    undoubtedly  accepted  as  far  as  m odour, 
it  went  by  a  vast  majority  of  subjects,  including  such 


2o8 


ECCLESIA    ANGLICANA. 


names  as  Bisliop  Gardiner  and  Mary  Tiidor.  When 
Edward  died,  the  Eeforming  cause  stank  in  the  nostrils 
of  almost  every  honest  citizen,  the  accession  of  Mary 
was  greeted  with  an  unparalleled  ebullition  of  enthu- 
siasm, and  the  suppression  of  Protestant  anarchy  was 
deemed  to  be  cheaply  purchased  by  a  disgraceful  sui- 
render  to  the  Pope.  Fortunate  it  is  for  our  Church 
that  Mary's  cup  of  cruelty  was  found  even  more 
unpalatable  than  that  mixture  of  hypocrisy,  profanity, 
and  greed  wherewith  the  Edwardian  "  vessels  of 
grace  "  brimmed  over. 

His  biographer  shows  that  throughout  the  flux  of 
his  religions  tenets  two  leading  ideas  had  a  permanent 
charm  for  Cranmer.^  One  was  the  Bible  as  a  corrective 
to  the  Church  ;  the  other,  the  royal  supremacy  as  a  defi- 
ance to  the  Pope.  His  fidelity  to  the  latter  conception 
was  now  illustrated  by  an  extraordinary  deference  to 
the  boy-king  and  his  representatives.  Henry  had 
cranmer's  insisted  on  giving  the  bishops  licences.  Cranmer 
and  letters  thought  it  ncccssary  to  apply  to  Edward  VI.  for  a 
renewal  of  his  licence,^  and  he  compelled  the  other 
prelates  to  do  the  same.  Worse  still,  he  contrived  the 
passing  of  an  Act  whereby  all  bishops  should  be  ap- 
pointed by  letters  patent  from  the  Crown,  without  the 
conge   d'elire^  which  had  hitherto  and  has  since  been 


patent. 


»  Hook,  Archbishops,  "  Thomas  Cranmer,"  p.  136. 

2  Burnet,  Records,  Tart  II.  p.  6. 

^  On  the  conge  d'elire,  which  at  present  exi>ts  as  a  mere  form.  Dean  Hook 
writes:  "It  is  wise,  however,  to  cling  to  a  form  which  may  hereafter  be  inspired 
with  life.  The  ceremonial  opening  of  Convocation  was  for  many  years  a  mere 
form,  but  by  attending  to  the  form  the  Convocation  was  prepared  to  act,  when 
that  liberty  of  action  ])crmitted  to  all  other  institutions  could  no  Ioniser  be  held 
from  the  Church  of  England.  The  time  may  come— much  to  be  deplored — when, 
in  a  revolutionary  age,  it  may  be  the  duty  of  the  Englisli  Church  in  a  popular 
movement  to  take  a  decided  part  against  the  Crown,  and  nothing  is  to  be  despised 
which  gives  to  any  inbtitution  the  power  of  free  action." — Archbishops,  "  Thomas 
Cranmer,"  p.  237. 


EDWARD    VI.  209 

ceded  to  the  dean  and  cliapter.    This  proceeding  excites      chap. 
our  indignation  as  an  encroachment  on  the  liberty  of     ■-J^X- 
the  subject.     It  is  yet  more  reprehensible  in  that  it  led 
contemporaries  and  posterity  to  believe  that  the  arch- 
bishop held  those  low  views  with  regard  to  his  sacred 
office   which  were   entertained   by  Somerset   and   the 
Gospel  "  professors."    Dean  Hook  has,  we  think,  cleared 
Cranmer  ^  of  real  participation  in  such  views,  pointing 
out  that  in  the  "  Bishops'  Book  "  of  1537,  in  the  "  King's 
Book"  of  1543,  and  in  the  Catechism  of  1548,  the  arch- 
bishop plainly  traces  Holy  Orders  to  an  Apostolic  source,  was 
And  he  is,  perhaps,  right  in  describing  Cranmer  as  an  an^Eras'^ 
"  ultra-Tory  "  rather  than  an  Erastian,  maintaining  that  *^^^^ 
the  nomination  to  bishoprics  was  vested  absolutely  in 
the  Crown,  just  as  he  maintained  that  the  king  held  his 
Crown  of  hereditary  right,  and  not  (as  all  other  primates 
had  believed)" by  consent  of  Church  and  State.    Cranmer 
may  have  known  that  such  royal  prerogative  no  more 
makes  the  Crown  the  source  of  episcopal  functions,  than 
the  prerogative  of  a  lay  patron  makes  him  competent 
to  confer  Holy  Orders.     But  the   Protestant  statesmen 
thought  otherwise,  and  we  do  not  find  that  Cranmer 
tried  to  enlighten  them. 

Having  done  their  best  to  secularize   the   Church's  Appropria- 
officers,  the  party  in  power  made  another  clutch  at  the  chantries. 
Church's  revenues.     A  bill  was  brought  in  to  confer  ^'^'  ■"•^^^ 
on  Edward  those  endowments  of  chantries,  hospitals, 
and  guilds  which  an  Act  of  Parliament  had  granted  to 
his  father.     Edward  would,  of  cour.se,  be  represented 

'  This,  however,  may  well  be  doubted  in  view  of  the  correspondence  between 
the  arclibishop  and  the  committee  of  divines  appointed  to  compose  the  Erudition. 
Cranmer  actually  commits  himself  to  such  statements  as  these:  "A  bishop  may 
make  a  priest  by  the  Scripture,  and  so  may  princes  and  governors  also."  "  He 
that  is  appointed  to  be  bisliop  or  priest  needeth  no  consecration  by  the  Scripture, 
for  election  or  appointmc  nt  thereto  is  sufiBcient." — See  Cranmer,  Remains  (Parker 
Society),  p.  117. 


2IO  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

by  tlie  Council.  The  chantries  were  chapels  endowed 
for  the  offering  of  prayers  and  masses  on  the  founder's 
behalf.  It  was  now  plausibly  argued  against  these 
foundations  that  "  a  great  part  of  superstition  and  error 
in  Christian  religion  "  was  due  to  the  retention  of  masses 
for  the  dead.  Cranmer  on  this  occasion  endeavoured 
to  resist  the  Protector.  The  uselessness  of  masses  for 
the  dead  he  could  not  j^et  have  realized,  and  he  per- 
haps dreaded  lest  this  insidious  bill  should  be  a  means 
of  despoiling  the  universities.  Adopting  for  the  nonce 
the  line  of  the  conservative  divines,  he  moved  that  the 
measure  might  well  be  postponed  till  the  king  should 
be  of  age.  His  proposal  won  the  support  of  the  Com- 
mons. But  a  hungry  clique  in  the  House  of  Lords 
vehemently  abetted  the  Protector's  scheme,  and  the  bill 
was  carried.  The  lands  and  other  endowments  of  the 
chantries  were  nominally  made  over  to  the  king.  They 
were  really  sold  for  little  or  nothing  to  Somerset's 
partisans. 

When  times  are  ripe  for  change,  it  requires  no  ordinary 
wisdom  and  firmness  to  enforce  the  distinction  between 
reform  and  revolution.  Henry  had  found  it  necessary 
to  curb  the  violence  of  the  Protestant  sectaries  with  the 

Violence      "  Act  of  Six  Articles."    This  and  the  Acts  of  Henry  IV. 

Reformers,  ^^cl  Henry  V.  against  Lollards  were,  of  course,  repealed 
by  the  Protector.  The  party  of  disorder  had  full 
liberty  of  action,  and  it  seemed  likely  that  Henry's  pro- 
gressive reformation  would  give  place  to  a  destruc- 
tive outbreak.  Two  extreme  men.  Barlow  Bishop  of 
S.  David's,  and  Eidley,  principal  of  Pembroke  Hall,  Cam- 
bridge, were  encouraged  to  denounce  the  old  ceremonial 
in  sermons  at  S.  Paul's  Cross.  Their  note  was  taken  up 
by  a  host  of  sycophant  preachers.  In  vain  Gardiner 
pleaded  with  the  Protector  that  the  use  of  images  and 


EDWARD    VI.  211 

holy   water   might   be   continued    without    danger    of      chap. 
superstition,  if  the   people  were  properly  instructed  ;      __ ^^'^ . 
that  it  would  be  found  easier  to  raise  than  to  direct 
this  flood  of  popular  captiousness  ;  above  all,  that  reli- 
gious innovations  were  inappropriate  while  a  child  was 
on  the  throne.^     The  ultra-Protestants  had  it  all  their 
own  way.     A  visitation  of  dioceses  was  ordered  by  the  The  visita- 
Protector,  which  threatened  to  deal  with  the  churches  ^o^eses. 
much   as  Cromwell   had   dealt  with   the   monasteries.  "^^^-  ^^'*'^' 
Every  picture,  every  image  was  to  be  treated  "  so  that 
there  should  be  no  memory  of  the  same."    Stained  glass  Desecra- 
was  destroyed ;  frescoes  were  whitewashed ;  bells  and  ornaments. 
altar  plate,  where  not  concealed  by  faithful  Churchmen, 
were  seized  and  consigned  to  the  melting-pot. 

For  the  execution  of  these  outrages  the  kingdom  was 
divided  into  six  circuits ;  to  each  circuit  was  appor- 
tioned a  committee  composed  of  two  gentlemen,  a  civi- 
lian, a  divine,  and  a  registrar,  and  accompanied  by  a 
cortege  of  Protestant  preachers.  Following  the  prece- 
dent of  Cromwell's  visitation,  the  Protector  suspended 
the  powers  of  the  bishops  while  the  visitation  lasted. 
"Injunctions"  with  regard  to  the  future  performance 
of  clerical  duties  were  to  be  circulated  by  the  visitors. 
The  purport  of  these  was  that  incumbents  were  to  use 
tlie  Litany  in  the  English  tongue ;  to  preach  about  the 
royal  supremacy  at  least  four  times  a  year ;  to  set  up 
copies  of  the  Bible  and  of  Erasmus's  Paraphrase  of  the 
Gospels ;  and  to  take  heed  that  all  shrines,  pictures, 
and  paintings  were  destroyed.  The  "  Book  of  Homilies  "  Enforce- 
was  also  forced  upon  their  acceptance  by  these  "  In-  ^l^rst 
junctions."  We  have  already  mentioned  the  publica-  Ho^j^jfes." 
tion  of  this  work  by  Archbishop  Cranmer.  Such 
curates  as  were  unable    to   produce  original   sermons 

'  See  the  Letters  in  Foxe,  Acts  and  Monuments,  vol.  vi.  p.  24  and  seg. 


212 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


were  now  charged  to  preach  one  of  the  Homilies  every 
Sunday. 

It  need  scarcely  be  observed  that  this  invasion  of 
clerical  rights  was  as  impolitic  as  it  was  discredit- 
able to  its  authors.  The  experiment  of  conducting 
visitations  by  means  of  an  inquisitorial  commission  had 
been  tried  and  universally  reprobated  when  the  monas- 
teries were  despoiled.  The  enforcement  of  a  new- 
religious  manual  on  the  sole  authority  of  the  primate 
was  unprecedented.  It  was  a  silly  feat  of  absolutism — 
the  more  silly  in  that  the  sanction  of  Convocation  would 
doubtless  have  been  easily  obtained  for  the  "  Book 
of  Homilies."  We  may  add  that  it  was  a  feat  charac- 
teristic of  such  a  mind  as  Crammer's.  Like  most 
weak  rulers,  the  primate  could  atone  for  vacilla- 
tion and  neglect  of  duty  by  occasional  instalments 
of  tjranny  in  quarters  where  tyranny  could  not  be 
resented. 

The  liberties  of  the  Church  were  now  bravely  main- 
tained by  Gardiner,  Bishop  of  Winchester.  He  did  not 
admire  the  Homilies  or  the  Paraphrase,  and  believed 
that  the  former  publication  contradicted  the  authori- 
tative Erudition  of  1543.  Nor  did  he  see  on  what 
ground  he,  as  a  bishop,  was  expected  to  enforce  the 
"  Injunctions."  They  had  no  authority,^  and  they  were 
not  needed.  In  short,  he  saw  his  "  late  sovereign 
slandered,  religion  assaulted,  the  realm  troubled,  and 

'  No  tenable  theory  of  the  relations  of  Church  and  State  admits  of  such  acts  of 
usurpation  as  were  perpetrated  in  the  reigns  of  Henry  VIII.  and  Edward  VI. 
The  sovereign  has  no  more  right  to  encroach  on  the  functions  of  sjmods  or  eccle- 
siastical officers  by  virtue  of  a  royal  supremacy  over  the  national  Church,  than 
he  has  to  supersede  the  secular  judges  and  administer  justice  in  person,  on  the 
plea  that  he  is  "  over  all  causes  within  his  dominion  supreme."  Nor  would  the 
acquiescence  of  courtier  prelates  of  the  Cranmer  type  make  such  transfer  of 
jurisdiction  a  whit  more  constitutional.  Gardiner,  in  arguing  that  royal  "  Injunc- 
tions "cannot  supersede  constitutional  rights,  instances  the  fate  of  VVolsey,  who 
had  (according  to  the  judges)  incurred  a  prczmunire  for  serving  Henry  too  well. 
See  the  Letter  in  Foxe,  vol.  vi.  p.  43. 


EDWARD    VL  213 

peaceable   men   disquieted."     He   could  but   cry — Let      chap. 
things   remain  as  Henry  VIII.   had  left  them.     The        ^^' ~. 
prelate's  influence  was  great;    it  was  therefore  deter- 
mined to  purchase  his  connivance  with  an  offer  of  a 
seat  in  the  Privy  Council.     But  Gardiner  was  not  of  He  is  im- 
the  venal  order  of  statesmen  so  common  at  this  time.  and°^^ 
He  remained  true  to  his  convictions,  and  refused  both  ^^^p"'^®^ 
"  Injunctions"  and  Homilies.     He  was  thereupon  com- 
mitted to  the  Fleet.     Shortly  afterwards,  he  was  re- 
quired to  preach  before  the  king  on  the  authority  of  the 
Council,  the  abolition  of  chantries,  the  use  of  common 
prayer  in  the  vernacular,  and  other  innovations.     His 
sermon,   says  an  unfriendly  historian,  "  was  such  as  a 
moderate  High  Church  English  divine  might  preach  at 
the   present  day,  with  applause  even  from  Evangeli- 
cals." ^  It  was  nevertheless  deemed  unsatisfactory ;   he 
was   committed   to   the    Tower,   and   the   Government 
licence  empowering  him  to  act  as  Bishop  of  Winchester 
was  withdrawn.     Later  on,  the  Council  disgraced  itself 
by  giving  the  bishopric  to  Poynet,  a  professed  ultra- 
Protestant,  who  consented  to   pay   an   enormous   per- 
centage of  the  episcopal  revenues.     Poynet  was  a  man  Poynet,  Ms 
of  some  ability,  and  the  Catechism  which  was  published 
with   the   forty-two   Articles   of    1553    was    his   com- 
position.     But    his   moral    character   was   notoriously 
bad.     It  appears  that  in  July,  1551,  he  was  convicted 
of  living   in   open    adultery   with    a    butcher's    wife, 
and  compelled  to  pay  the  outraged  husband  a  yearly 
fine. 

A  less  determined  resistance  was  offered  by  Bonner,  Bishop 
Bishop  of  London,  a  prelate  of  staunch  Catholic  prin- 
ciples, but  in  character  altogether  inferior  to  Gardiner. 
Bonner    professed  to    receive    the    "  Injunctions "   and 

'  Froude,  History  of  England,  vol.  vi.  p.  347. 


214 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


CHAP. 

IX. 


Homilies  "under  protest.  This  was  not  considered  suffi- 
cient, and  an  incarceration  in  the  Fleet  soon  induced 
him  to  withdraw  his  protest.  He  was  accordingly 
restored  for  a  time  to  liberty. 

Foreign  Protestantism  had  in  vain  attempted  to 
meddle  with  the  English  Eeformation  under  Henry. 
The  present  reign  was  more  propitious  to  such  in- 
fluences. Continental  refugees  swarmed  into  England, 
and  for  a  time  obtained  influence  among  the  clergy  and 
in  the  universities.  Cranmer,  "  ever  learning,"  accorded 
them  a  patronage  which  was  too  often  requited  with 
an  offensive  assumption  of  spiritual  superiority.  The 
Lutherans  appear  to  have  had  most  influence  with  the 
primate ;  the  Calvinists  were  the  most  insolent  and 
dictatorial.  Vermigli,  commonly  called  Peter  Martyr, 
who  had  struck  out  a  line  between  those  of  Luther 
and  Zuingli,  was  placed  in  the  divinity  chair  at  Oxford, 
in  1548.  Bucer,  an  excellent  divine  of  similar  senti- 
ments, held  the  same  position  at  Cambridge,  and  with 
him  came  Paul  Fagius,  an  erudite  Hebraist.  Bernard 
Ochin,  a  less  creditable  sample  of  foreign  Protestantism, 
who  defended  polygamy  and  eventually  became  a 
Socinian,  was  made  a  prebend  of  Canterbury.  John 
a  Lasco,  a  learned  Polish  nobleman,  was  appointed 
superintendent  of  the  foreign  congregations  in  London, 
and  is  supposed  to  have  had  much  weight  with 
Cranmer.  It  must,  however,  be  admitted  that  none 
of  the  religious  formularies  of  this  reign  gave  satis- 
faction to  the  foreigners.  They  were  the  first  to  abuse 
every   publication  ^   of    the   Reforming    prelates,    and 


'  The  usual  tone  of  the  foreign  teachers  is  illustrated  by  a  letter  written  by 
John  ab  Ulmis  to  Bullinger  on  the  subject  of  Cranmer's  Catechism  :  "  I  would 
have  you  know  this  for  certain,  that  this  Thomas  has  fallen  into  so  heavy  a 
slumber  that  we  entertain  but  a  very  cold  hope  that  he  will  be  aroused  even  by 
your  most  learned  letter.     For  he  has  lately  published  a  Catechism,  in  which  he 


EDWARD    VI.  215 

showed  themselves  utterly  unable  to  distinguish  be-  chap. 
tween  reformation  such  as  Henry  had  inaugurated  and  ^^•_.  , 
schism  such  as  had  found  favour  on  the  Continent. 
Had  matters  been  left  entirely  in  their  hands,  the 
Church  would  doubtless  have  become  a  Protestant 
sect.  When  Edward  died,  these  clamorous  divines 
hastily  fled,  resigning  the  crown  of  martyrdom  to  the 
prelates  whose  faint-heartedness  they  had  so  often 
impugned. 

We   have   noticed   the    publication   of    an   English 
Litany  in  1545,  and  the  appointment  of  a  commission 
to  revise  the  missal  and  breviary.     It  is  not  clear  how 
far  this  commission  had  proceeded  before  the  death  of  ^iie 
Henry.     On  the  accession  of  Edward  two  crucial  ques-  ^^charist 

•^  -I  contro- 

tions  affecting  the  character  of  the  future  missal  ^ersy. 
became  the  subject  of  much  public  discussion.  The 
divines  of  the  Old  Learning  maintained  the  dogma  of 
transubstantiation,  and  discerned  in  the  Holy  Eucharist 
a  sacrificial  efficacy,  which  might  benefit  the  souls  of 
the  departed.  Cranmer's  continental  friends,  on  the 
other  hand,  though  differing  among  themselves  as  to 
the  meaning,  value,  and  efficacy  of  the  Sacrament,  were 
unanimous  in  disavowing  transubstantiation,  and  in 
treating  the  sacred  rite  as  a  communion  rather  than 
a  sacrifice.  Many  English  divines  held  these  views,  com- 
and  Cranmer  was  fast  inclining  to  them.  On  Decem-  ^^^^^^s 
ber  2,  1547,  Convocation  had  unanimously  resolved 
that  the  Sacrament  ought  to  be  received  in  both  kinds. 
Government,  perhaps  mindful  of  the  effect  of  such 
religious  changes  on  the  much-coveted  cbantries,  had 
promptly  passed  an  Act  to  the  same  effect  (Dec.  20). 

has  not  only  approved  that  foul  and  sacrilegious  transubstantiation  of  the  Papists 
in  the  Holy  Supper  of  our  Saviour,  but  all  tbe  dreams  of  Luther  seem  to  him 
sufBciently  well  grounded."  In  a  similar  strain  John  Burcher  writes  to  Bullinger 
with  reference  to  the  same  subject. 


2l6 


ECCLESIA  ANGLICANA. 


In  March,  1548,  without  further  appeal  to  Convoca- 
tion,   a   Latin-English    missal   was    published    in    the 

The  Latin-    king's  name  which  provided  for  the  change  of  practice. 

missal.  This  missal  was  compiled  by  the  thirteen  divines^  who 
were  engaged  in  revising  the  ancient  Offices,  and  who 
at  the  close  of  this  year  brought  out  the  new  Book  of 
Common  Prayer,  commonly  called  the  Prayer-book  of 
1549.  In  this  missal  we  find  a  less  marked  deviation 
from  the  mediaaval  usage  than  in  the  work  which 
superseded  it.  The  service  is  in  Latin  until  the  priest 
has  himself  partaken  of  the  elements,  and  the  holy 
rite  is  termed  a  sacrifice  ^  for  living  and  dead.  The 
English  portion  begins  with  an  exhortation  not  very 
different  from  our  "Dearly  beloved  in  the  Lord." 
Then  come  the  address,  "  Ye  that  do  truly  and  earnestly 
repent,"  the  Confession,  and  the  Absolution,  the  last 
differing  slightly  from  the  form  now  in  use.  Then  the 
"  comfortable  words,"  the  prayer  of  humble  access,  and 
the  formulae  of  administration.  The  clauses,  "  Take 
and  eat  this,  etc.,"  "  Drink  this,  etc.,"  as  yet  form  no 
part  of  these  formulae.  The  Office  then  closes  with  the 
blessing.  The  greater  part  of  this  Office  was,  of  course, 
taken  from  the  ancient  missals ;  what  new  matter  was 
added  was  borrowed  from  the  "  Consultation "  of 
Hermann,  Archbishop  of  Cologne. 

*  Cranmer,  Day,  Goodryke,  Skyp,  Holbeach,  Ridley,  and  Thirlebj',  all  of  the 
episcopate ;  Deans  May,  Taylor,  and  Haynes ;  and  Doctors  Eobertson,  Redman, 
and  Cox.  Day,  Thirleby,  and  Skyp  formed  a  conservative  minority  which  protested 
against  the  changes  embodied  in  the  Prayer-book  which  their  brethren  brought 
out  at  the  end  of  this  year. 

^  It  is  plain  that  a  prominence  is  given  to  the  sacrificial  character  of  the 
function  which  is  missing  in  the  Prayer-book  of  1549.  In  the  latter,  as  in  our 
present  Prayer-book,  the  sacrificial  character  is  not  excluded,  but  made  subordinate. 
It  is  mentioned  only  in  the  prayer  which  now  follows  the  act  of  reception.  In  the 
Missal  of  1548,  on  the  other  hand,  the  priest  is  directed  to  "  olfer  the  sacrifice  unto 
the  Lord,"  with  the  prayer  (in  Latin),  "  Receive  .  .  .  this  oblation  which  I,  an 
unworthy  sinner,  offer  in  Thine  honour,  and  in  that  of  Blessed  Mary  and  of  all 
Thy  saints,  for  mine  own  sins  and  offences,  and  for  the  health  and  salvation  of  the 
living,  and  for  the  rest  of  all  the  faithful  departed." 


EDWARD    VI.  217 

This  Latin-Engiisli  missal  was  probably  intended  to      chap. 
j)ave  the  way  for  the  English  Prayer-book.    Its  publica-        ^^-    . 
tion  excited  much  controversy,  and  the  nature  of  the 
Eucharist  became  such  a   burning  question  that  the 
Government  thought  fit  in  the  antumn  of  this  year  to 
inhibit  all  preaching.     Meantime  the  thirteen  divines  The  "First 
were  preparing  the  collection  of  English  Offices  which  bookof 
formed  the  "  First  Prayer-book  of  Edward  VI."     They  vi"^^""** 
finished  their  work   in  November.     The  book  is  de-  ^'^  ^^^^" 
scribed   by  the  Council  as  "  agreed  to  by  the  whole 
clergy,"  and  as  having  received  the  consent  of  "  the 
bishops  and   all   other   the   learned   men  in   this  our 
realm  in   their   synods   and   convocations   provincial." 
In  this  matter,  then,  we  may  infer  that  deference  to 
the  constitutional  privileges  of  Convocation  was  deemed 
advisable.     The  Prayer-book  received  the  sanction  of 
the  king  in  Council,  and  was  laid  before  Parliament  in 
December. 

It  encountered  much  opposition,  especially  from  eight 
bishops  in  the  Upper  House.  At  last  an  Act  enforcing 
its  exclusive  reception  on  and  after  Whitsunday  follow- 
ing was  carried,  and  the  provisions  of  this  Act  were 
forestalled  by  the  London  clergy,  who  adopted  the  new 
Office  as  early  as  Easter.  This  "  Act  of  Uniformity  " 
says  nothing  about  any  change  in  doctrine,  but  only 
dwells  on  the  inconvenience  caused  by  the  divergencies 
in  the  Uses  of  Sarum,  York,  Bangor,  Lincoln,  etc.,  and 
on  the  advantages  of  uniformity.  Penalties  for  de- 
praving or  ridiculing  the  Prayer-book  were  provided  by 
this  Act,  and  a  subsequent  Order  in  Council  prescribed 
the  destruction  of  such  "  books  called  antiphones, 
manuals,  missals,  grails,  processionals,"  etc.,  as  should  be 
judged  obstructive  to  the  new  Office.  We  shall  hereafter 
mention  in  detail  the  respects  in  which  the  first  Prayer- 


2i8  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

CHAP,     book  differed  from  our  present  Book  of  Common  Prayer. 

. Ji^     One  obvious  deficiency  in  the  new  formulary — the  ab- 

TheEngiish  scncc  of  an  Ordinal — was  soon  met  by  the  appointment 
Feb.  1550.  of  a  Committee  consisting  of  "  six  prelates  and  six 
other  men  learned  in  God's  law."  By  one  of  those 
pieces  of  proleptic  legislation  so  common  in  this  period, 
the  ordinal  drawn  up  by  these  commissioners  had 
legal  authority  before  it  was  completed.  It  was  pub- 
lished, with  the  assent  of  eleven  of  the  twelve  com- 
missioners, on  February  28,  1550. 

The  Prayer-book  of  1549  appears  to  have  satisfied 
neither  party.  The  foreign  divines  especially  resented 
its  conservative  spirit,  and  Cranmer  was  reproached 
with  indifference  to  the  tenets  of  Protestantism.  In 
deference  to  the  opinion  of  these  persons  the  work  was 
recast,  and  there  appeared  in  April,  1552,  that  Second 
Prayer-book  of  Edward  VI.  in  which  the  Communion 
Service  is  so  mutilated  that  it  might  well  be  mistaken 
for  a  mere  memorial  rite.  Forttinatel}',  the  death  of 
Edward  occurred  before  the  date  which  was  to  give 
this  work  legal  authority.  Though  circulated  in 
certain  dioceses,  it  never  had  even  State  sanction, 
much  less  the  approval  of  Convocation.  The  Prayer- 
book  of  Elizabeth,  though  sanctioning  many  of  the 
concessions  made  to  the  Eeforming  party  in  1552, 
restored  the  central  act  of  Christian  worship  to  its  true 
dignity. 
Clerical  In  the  Opinion  of  most  members  of  our  communion 

the  compulsory  celibacy  of  the  clei'gy  is  one  of  the  most 
pernicious  accessories  of  the  mediaeval  system.  It  is 
surprising,  therefore,  to  find  that  it  was  with  the 
erreatest  reluctance  that  Edward's  Parliament  ceded  to 
the  priesthood  the  right  of  marrying.  Convocation 
had  decided  that  the  clergy  should    be   free   in   this 


celibacy. 


EDWARD    VI.  219 

matter.  A  bill  permitting  tlie  ordination  of  married  cfiap. 
men  was  discussed  in  December,  1547,  but  could  not  -_ii__- 
obtain  the  sanction  of  the  Lords.  The  subject  was 
again  brought  before  the  Houses  in  1548,  and  a  repeal 
of  all  positive  laws  enforcing  celibacy  was  grudgingly 
conceded.  The  Act  was  saddled  with  this  testimony 
to  the  state  of  popular  sentiment :  "  It  were  better 
for  the  estimation  of  priests,  and  therefore  much 
to  be  wished,  that  they  would  willingly  endeavour 
themselves  to  a  perpetual  chastity."  The  popular  pre- 
judice on  this  subject  is  the  more  remarkable  since  the 
clergy  of  England  had  never  been  pledged  to  celibacy 
by  a  special  vow.  They  only  transgressed  a  canon  of 
the  Church  by  entering  the  state  of  matrimony.  Such 
transgression  was  winked  at — was,  in  fact,  rather  the 
rule  than  the  exception.  By  ascetics  it  was  inveighed 
against  in  no  measured  terms — terms  which  modern 
Protestants  have  sometimes  interpreted  as  proving  the 
gross  licentiousness  of  mediaeval  times.  But,  as  a  rule, 
neither  priests  nor  laymen  saw  much  harm  in  the 
prevalent  neglect  of  this  canon.  Archbishop  Warham 
was  a  married  man ;  so  probably  was  Wolsey ;  so  cer- 
tainly was  Cranmer.  It  might  certainly  have  been  survival  of 
supposed  that  these  and  countless  other  conspicuous  ^ 
cases  had  prepared  the  country  for  the  abrogation  of 
the  nominal  restrictions.  By  both  parties,  however, 
this  concession  to  the  clergy  was  disliked.  The  so- 
called  Eeformers  were,  as  we  have  before  observed, 
to  a  large  extent  men  who  merely  hated  the  clergy ; 
to  this  section  anything  calculated  to  extend  clerical 
liberties  was  necessarily  displeasing.  The  conserva- 
tive minority  had,  of  course,  now  learnt  to  regard  all 
religious  changes  with  suspicion.  So  unacceptable 
was  the  measure  that  in  1552  another  statute  had  to  be 


220  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

CHAP,      passed,  declaring  that  cliildren  of  married  clergymen 
■   ^^-        must  be  regarded  as  legitimate. 

The  Parliaments  of  this  reign  readil}^  undertook  the 
discussion  of  all  such  subjects  as  are  the  province  of 
clerical  assemblies.  In  the  session  of  1548  the  duty 
of  fasting  received  consideration.  A  liberal  view  with 
regard  to  superstitious  restrictions  is  easily  attained 
Fasting  v^hcn  we  ourselves  are  the  parties  restricted.  The 
torious.  Houses  clung,  as  we  have  seen,  to  clerical  celibacy,  but 
they  readily  acknowledged  that  there  was  nothing 
pleasing  to  God  in  observance  of  fasts.  But  by  an 
amusing  amalgamation  of  things  sacred  and  secular,  they 
ruled  that  the  days  of  abstinence,  Fridays  and  Saturdays 
in  Lent,  the  Ember  days,  etc.,  should  still  be  strictly 
kept,  since  their  observance  impelled  men  to  eat 
fish,  and  "  by  eating  of  fish  much  flesh  is  saved  to  the 
country." 

The  years  1549  and  1550  did  much  to  embitter  the 
animosity  of  religious  parties.  The  foreign  Protestants, 
disgusted  at  the  conservative  character  of  the  Prayer- 
book,  vented  their  wrath  in  clamorous  denunciations  of 
the  Old  Learning.  They  challenged  their  adversaries 
Disputes  on  to  public  disputations  at  the  two  universities.      The 

the  Sacra-  i  i      i  p 

mental  subject  of  the  Ecal  Presence  was  the  usual  theme  oi 
disputation,  and  the  doctrine  of  transubstantiation  was, 
of  course,  specially  assailed  by  the  champions  of  foreign 
Protestantism.  Their  conduct  in  these  controversies 
can  hardly  be  considered  creditable.  They  refused 
to  treat  the  scholastic  term  "  transubstantiation  "  in  its 
scholastic  sense,  but  persistently  argued  as  if  it  implied 
"  transaccidentation  " — an  easy  butt  for  their  ridicule. 
Sometimes  they  would  decline  to  argue  unless  their 
adversaries  confined  themselves  to  terms  used  in  the  New 
Testament,  though  it  was  a  palpable  petitio  p-incipii  to 


EDWARD    VI.  221 

assume  that  tlie  New  Testament  writers  had  spoken 
exhaustively  on  the  nature  of  the  Holy  Eucharist.  In 
this  way  a  cheap  triumph  was  secured  by  Peter  Martyr, 
who  ousted  Dr.  Smith  from  the  divinity  chair  at  Oxford. 
The  same  unfairness  marks  Cranmer's  strategy  in  his 
pamphlet  controversy  with  Gardiner.  Again  and  again  Unfairness 
the  champion  of  the  Old  Learning  explains  what  is  of  the 

,..  ,,  .,  ,,      Reforming: 

transubstantiation  and  what  it  is  not ;   as  repeatedly  champions. 
Cranmer  invei's-hs  asrainst  transaccidentation  as  if  it        •»/  l 

were  maintained  by  Gardiner.^     Cranmer  was  probably  f 

little  versed  in  scholastic  theology,  but  it  can  hardly  y  Hak-^^mm,  ^  >»^ 
be  maintained  that  he  did  not  know  the  meaning  of  a  j||^  lJnto^<lb 
dogma  for  the  denial  of  which  he  had  recently  sent  men        .         "AjtM^ 
to  the  stake.     Transubstantiation  doubtless  was,  and  is,  g       ^ 

confounded  with  transaccidentation  by  illiterate  Eoman-  <***-  u«.  ^♦^''♦^vv*-^ 
ists  as  well  as  illiterate  Protestants.   It  is,  in  fact,  one  of  f^^  tlw   Wi^Gk* 
the  many  objectionable  features  in  this  dogma  that  it  en-      i^^  CHoJt «.     i*4. 
forces  the  general  acceptance  of  an  idea  which  none  but        «  > 

the  educated  can  apprehend.     Misapprehension,  how-  mMif^^^  ^vwir-e- 
ever,  can  hardly  be  pleaded  on  behalf  of  controversialists   m*^  jv'v**<*^w-  ; 
who  had  studied  theology,  and  studied  it  as  Eomanists.      Ho  guH^jS^t^^ 
It  need  scarcely  be  said  that  in  such  controversies  ccu^  Ct.  tAot^jt^Ji 
the  New  Learning  always  came  off  triumphant.  Bonner's  uu»Jg,4j  ^  a  cci' 
celebrated  apophthegm  at  the  Marian  disputation,  "  You  dju^  «u=*.  aX^^ 
have  the  word,  but  we  have  the  sword,"  was  j)raetically  Theoid   r  /^ni.yci/ 
forestalled  by  the  behaviour  of  the  Reformers  to  the  proscribed 

'  Here  is  a  specimen  of  Cranmer's  controversial  style.  Gardiner  has  been 
pleading  that  the  terras  "sensibly,"  "really,"  "substantially,"  •'  corporally,"  were 
used  by  Transubstantiationists,  and  even  Lutherans,  in  the  scholastic  sense,  and 
must  be  so  interpreted  by  his  adversary.  Cranmer  replies,  "  When  you  come 
here  to  your  iies, declaring  the  words 'sensibly,' '  reaUy,' '  substantiaUy,'  .  .  .  you 
speak  so  fondly  unlearnedly  and  ignorantly  as  they  that  knew  you  not  right 
think  you  understood  neither  grammar,  English,  nor  reason.  ,  .  .  All  Englishmen 
understand  by  these  words  .  .  .  the  manner  and  form  of  being,  and  not  the  thing 
itself  without  the  said  forms  and  manners.  .  .  .  But  this  one  thing  I  wonder  at, 
that  you,  being  so  much  used  to  lie,  do  not  yet  know  what  'ly'  meaneth." — 
Cranmer  on  the  Lord's  Supper  (Parker  Society),  157,  158. 


222  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

Transiibstantiationists.  Penalties  were  attached  to  a 
retention  of  the  old  mif-sal  after  Whitsuntide,  1549. 
Gardiner  had  been  ali  eady  imprisoned ;  Bonner  and 
other  bishops  of  the  Old  Learning  were  soon  to  share 
his  fate.  When  religious  sympathies  and  indignation 
at  the  Council's  mismanagement  imjoelled  the  Oxford- 
shiie  peasantry  to  insurrection,  the  parit^h  priests  were 
promptly  hanged  by  Lord  Gray  from  their  own  church 
towers.  "Godly  jealousy  for  the  Gospel"  not  un- 
frequently  gave  its  peculiar  interpretation  to  the 
Pauline  adage  that  "  godliness  is  great  gain."  Such 
relics  of  superstition  as  church  bells  and  Communion 
vessels  of  silver  had  already  found  their  way  to  the 
Government  melting-pots.  A  greedy  eye  was  now 
Maiadmin-  cast  on  the  cpiscopal  revenues.  Most  sees  were  in  this 
of^sees?'^  reign  robbed  of  their  best  manors.  The  occupants 
uving-s.and  counted  themselvcs  fortunate  if  the  alienation  took  the 

university 

revenues,  insidious  form  of  an  exchange.  In  some  dioceses  the 
bishopric  was  kept  vacant  and  administered  by  a 
Government  agent.  *  The  squire  who  had  Church 
patronage  dutifully  followed  the  lead.  He  "  protested  " 
against  Catholicism  by  instituting  to  his  vacant  benefice 
his  steward,  or  huntsman,  or  gamekeeper,  and  quietly 
pocketing  the  revenues.  Avarice  and  bigotry,  even 
when  the  accessories  of  a  New  Learning,  are  as  inimical 
to  the  cause  of  education  as  to  that  of  religion.  The 
universities  accordingly  suffered  as  severely  as  the 
Church.  The  professors  of  a  stereotyped  Gospel  could 
aiford  to  scorn  learned  pursuits  and  vote  degrees  anti- 
Christian.  Government  showed  its  sympathy  for  this 
ultra-Protestant  contingent  by  suppressing  exhibitions 
and  professorships  both  at  Oxford  and  Cambridge. 
Both  universities  were  forsaken  by  the  studious, 
and    given   over   to   irreverent   undergraduate  orgies. 


EDWARD    VI.  223 

*'  Missals  were  chopped  in  pieces  with  hatchets ;  college 
libraries  plundered  and  burnt.  The  divinity  schools 
were  planted  with  cabbages,  and  the  Oxford  laundresses 
dried  clothes  in  the  School  of  Arts.  Anarchy  was 
avenging  superstition,  again  in  turn  to  be  more  fright- 
fully avenged."  ^ 

The  conduct  of  domestic  and  foreign  policy  in  this 
reign  vv^as  as  unsatisfactory  as  that  of  religious  reform. 
The  jDresent  was   an  era  of  great  social  change.     The 
decay  of  the  feudal  system — the  transfer  of  land  to  the 
commercial  class — the  increasing  wool  trade,  with  the 
consequent  conversion  of  arable  into  pasture  land  and 
diminution  of  agricultural  labour — the  introduction  of 
foreign  luxuries  and  diversion  of  money  hitherto  spent 
at  home ; — these  were  problems  with  which  the  present 
Government  was  quite  unable  to  cope.     Abroad  unsuc-  Political 
cessful   wars   were   being   waged    with   Scotland   and  J'gement. 
France.     At  home  the  administration  was  an  outrao-e 
alike  to  principles    of  economy  and  to  the  dictates  of 
justice.     Money  was  borrowed  from  foreign  usurers  at 
enormous  percentage ;    the  coinage  was  debased  again 
and  again ;  the  landed  gentry  were  allowed  to  enclose 
the  commons  hitherto  accessible  to  the  poor ;  and  when 
religious  houses  were  suppressed  no  provision  was  made 
for  the  continuance  of  alms.     The  dissatisfaction  of  the  Revolt 
lower  orders  asserted  itself  in  the  form  of  insurrection.  JJeiTew 
The  movement  in  Devonshire  and   Cornwall  cost  the  reUg-ion. 
lives  of  five  thousand  men ;  almost  as  many  perished  in 
Norfolk.      Strategy,  like   theology,  looked   abroad   for 
assistance,  and  while  German  divines  argued  down  the 
champions  of  Catholicism,    German  Lanzknechts   shot 
down  the  rebels.    It  is  not  surprising  that  the  peasantry 
ascribed   their   sufferings   to    the   introduction   of  the 

'  Froude,  vol.  v.  p.  270. 


224 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


Lamenta- 
tions of 
Latimer. 


Maladmin- 
istration 
continued 
by  North- 
umberland. 


New  Learning  and  clamoured  for  the  restoration  of  the 
missal.  Nor  was  the  Reforming  party  without  ad- 
herents who  could  discern  that  a  Puritan  faith  did  not 
necessarily  involve  purity  of  practice,  and  who  could 
depict  in  their  true  colours  the  proceedings  of  the 
Government.  Latimer,  who  did  not  return  to  his 
bishopric  on  Edward's  accession,  but  devoted  himself  to 
preaching,  boldly  attacked  the  landlord  class  as  "  rent 
raisers,"  "step  lords,"  "who  do  intend  plainly  to  make 
the  yeomanry  slavery."  While  the  foreign  preachers 
likened  the  depredators  to  Moses  or  Joshua,  or  dubbed 
them  "  valiant  soldiers  in  Christ,"  this  true  Reformer 
saw  little  cause  for  Protestant  self-congratulation  in 
the  present  state  of  affairs.  "  In  times  past,"  he  says, 
"  men  were  full  of  pit}'-  and  compassion  .  .  .  now  charity 
is  waxen  old,  none  helpeth  the  scholar,  nor  yet  the  poor; 
now  that  the  knowledge  of  God's  word  is  brought  to 
light,  and  many  earnestly  study  and  labour  to  set  it  forth, 
almost  no  man  helpeth  to  maintain  them."  ^  To  the 
same  effect  spoke  Bernard  Gilpin.  Cranmer  did  not  de- 
nounce the  prevalent  antinomianism,  but  his  confidence 
in  the  foreign  preachers  appears  to  have  been  shaken. 

Somerset's  mismanagement  resulted  in  his  disgrace 
in  the  autumn  of  1549.  His  life  was  for  the  present 
spared,  but  he  was  deprived  of  the  Protectorate,  and 
henceforth  the  leading  spirit  in  the  Council  was  War- 
wick, created  in  1551  Duke  of  Northumberland  The 
Old  Learning  party,  at  first  inclined  to  regard  this 
change  with  satisfaction,  found  that  it  brought  them 
little  benefit.  By  Bale,  the  chaplain  of  Bishop  Poynet, 
Northumberland  is  described  as  the  "  second  Moses  "  of 
the  reign.  Even  Hooper  could  represent  him  as  "a  most 
holy   and   fearless   instrument   of    the    end    of    God," 

'  See  Latimer's  Sermons  (Parker  Society),  Sermons  vi.    nd  vii. 


EDWARD    VL  225 

because  also  "  the  terror  and  thunderbolt  of  the  Roman      chap. 
bishops."      Really  he  inherited   the  avarice  and   inca-        ^^- 
pacity,  without  the  religious  convictions,  of  the  minister 
whom  he  succeeded.      Protestantism  of  a  Calvinistic 
type  continued  in  the  ascendant,  and  it  became  plain 
that  concessions  would  be  made  to  this  school  of  relisrion 
in  the  formularies  of  the  future.      Already  the  Govern- 
ment,   provoked   by   the   anti-Protestant   cries   of    the 
insurgents,  had  assumed  a  more  uncompromising  atti- 
tude with  reference  to  the  Old  Learning.     The  autumn  "injunc- 
of  1549  had  produced  a  new  batch  of  "  Injunctions,"  against  the 
which  rendered  it  impossible  for  the  conservative  clergy  r^uai^* 
to  qualify  their  adoption  of  the  new  Praj^er-book  by  a  ^'^'  ^^^^ 
retention  of  the  ancient  ritual.     These  "  Injunctions  " 
prohibited  many  practices^  hitherto  used  at  the  cele- 
bration  of    mass,   and   allowed    not    more   than    one 
celebration  in  a  day. 

Foremost  among  those  clergy  who  had  obeyed   the  Bonner 
letter  of  the  law  while  detesting  its  spirit  had  been  example  of. 
Bonner,    Bishop   of  London.      The   treatment   of  this 
malcontent  was  as  unjust  as  that  of  Gardiner,  and  it  is 
unpleasant  to  record  that  Hooper  was  foremost  among 
his  persecutors.     Bonner  was  ordered,  in  the  July  of 
this  year,  to  preach  a  sermon  at  Paul's  Cross  on  behalf 
of  the  Government  and  their  Erastian  policy.     He  was 
to  state  that   the  rebels  "  were  incurring  damnation, 
ever  to  be  in  the  burning  fire  of  hell  with  Lucifer ; " 
that  the  magistrate  might  change  the  rites,  forms,  and 

'  Among  the  particular  practices  forbidden  are  kissing  the  altar,  breathing 
upon  the  bread  or  chalice,  ringing  of  sacring  bells,  and  '•  setting  any  light  upon  the 
Lord's  Table  at  any  time."  With  reference  to  the  last-named  practice,  it  is  notice- 
able that  the  first  set  of  "  Injunctions"  had  ordered  "  two  lights  on  the  altar  afore  the 
Sacrament,  for  signification  that  Christ  is  the  true  light  of  the  world."  A  notorious 
verdict  of  recent  date  has,  however,  prohibited  this  most  suggestive  ancient  emblem, 
in  defiance  of  the  rubric,  which  orders  the  retention  of  the  ornaments  commonly 
used  in  1548. 

Q 


226  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

ceremonies  of  religion  at  his  pleasure;  that  the  Govern- 
ment had  this  power  during  Edward's  nonage;  and  that 
the  devotion  of  a  person  retaining  the  Latin  service  was 
rendered  valueless  by  his  sin  in  disobeying  the  magis- 
trate.    Bonner  was  coarse,  vulgar,  and  cruel,  but  hypo- 
crisy was  no  part  of  his  character.     In  preaching  he 
omitted  some   of  the   topics  prescribed ;  on  others   he 
discoursed  in  an  unsatisfactory  manner.     Hooper  was 
employed  to  indict  him ;  he  was  committed  to  the  Mar- 
shalsea,  and  in  October  was  deprived  of  his  bishopric. 
Ridley's      The  couduct  of  the  great  Reforming  bishop  who  w^as 
innova-        appointed  to  succeed  him  was  as  indefensible  as  that  of 
juSei  1550.  Hooper.     Acting  on  his  own  responsibility,  Eidley  had 
begun  to  substitute  tables  for  altars  in  his  diocese  of 
Rochester.     When  translated  to  London,  he  pulled  down 
the  altar  at  S.  Paul's,  and  ordered  that  throughout  his 
diocese  the  "Lord's  board"  should  be  set  up,  "after  the 
form  of  an  honest  table,"  in  such  place  as  should  be 
considered  convenient.     Ridley  probably  thought  that 
the  impending  revision  of  the  Prayer-book  would  justify 
this   transformation,    which   really  might  imply  that 
the  Sacrament  was  only  a  commemorative  meal.     But 
that  an  individual  bishop  should  make  this  change  while 
the  "  Act  of  Uniformity  "   still  sanctioned  a  Eucharistic 
Sanctioned  scrvicc  of  a  Catholic  character,  was  strange  indeed.    The 
Council.      inconsistency,  however,  was  indiscernible  to  the  Council, 
Nov.  1550.    ^r}^Q   jj^   November   legalized    Ridley's  innovation   by 
ordering  all  the  bishops  to  remove  altars  and  substitute 
tables   "  to  be  set  up  in  some  convenient  part  of  the 
chancel."     This  arrangement  was  treated  by  Elizabeth 
in  the  spirit  of  compromise,^  and  the  j)ractice  of  placing 
the  altar   lengthways  down  the  chancel  was  not   suc- 
cessfully resisted  until  the  time  of  Archbishop  Laud. 

^  See  pp.  301,  302. 


EDWARD    VL  227 

A  memorial  of  this  singular  arrano;ement  still  exists  in      ch.m'. 

.  .  IX. 

that  rubric  of  the  Communion  Office  which  describes  — . — 
the  priest  standing  at  the  middle  of  the  altar  as 
"  standing  at  the  north  side  of  the  table  " — a  prescription 
which  can  only  harmonize  with  the  present  arrangement 
of  the  altar  when  "  north  side  "  is  interpreted  as  "  west 
side."  It  is  pleasant  to  learn  that  this  degradation  of 
the  Church's  most  sacred  rite  was  staunchly  resisted  b}'' 
some  of  the  bishops.    Day,  Bishop  of  Chichester,  refused  More 

,  .  .  bishops  in 

compliance,  and  was  imprisoned.  His  fate  was  shared  prison. 
by  Heath  of  Worcester,  who  had  also  offended  by 
refusing  to  attest  the  new  ordinal  with  his  fellow- 
commissioners.  The  most  eminent  of  the  imprisoned 
prelates,  Gardiner  of  Winchester,  had  recently  been 
offered  concessions  on  condition  of  his  signing  a  con- 
fession of  guilt.  Gardiner  perhaps  recalled  to  mind  the 
signatures  wrung  from  the  abbots  in  Henry's  reign. 
He  was  wise  enough  to  regard  the  offer  as  a  snare.  As 
a  penalty  for  his  contumacy,  he  was  "  removed  to  a 
meaner  lodging,"  denied  the  use  of  books,  pen,  ink,  and 
paper  "  to  work  his  detestable  purposes,"  and  formally 
deprived  by  a  mixed  commission  of  clergy  and  laymen. 
Hardly  less  eminent  among  the  men  of  the  Old  Learn- 
ing was  Tonstal,  the  Bishop  of  Durham.  This  prelate's 
estates  were,  moreover,  a  kind  of  Naboth's  vineyard  to 
Northumberland.  Tonstal  had  accepted  the  religious 
changes  ordered  by  the  Council ;  he  therefore  escaped 
for  a  time.  At  the  end  of  1551,  when  Somerset  at- 
tempted to  regain  power,  Tonstal  was  imprisoned  for 
alleged  complicity  in  his  plot.  He  was  deprived  shortly 
afterwards,  and  an  attempt  was  made  to  transfer  the 
greater  part  of  the  temporalities  of  the  see  to  Northum- 
berland. The  sees  of  Westminster  and  Gloucester  had  ma  sees 
been  already  plundered.  robbaa. 


228  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

CHAP.         We  may  here  notice  the  Council's  dealings  with  an- 

—^^     other  recusant  of  even  more  importance  than  Gardiner. 

Attempt  to  The  Princess  Mary  continued   to  use   the  mass.     She 

coerce  the  t     •  i  t     •  i  /.    -n- 

Princess  had  acquicsced  m  the  religious  changes  of  Henry  s 
reign,  but  she  was  not  attracted  by  the  Erastianism  of 
Edward's  Council,  and  she  resolutely  refused  to  ac- 
knowledge any  innovations  introduced  during  the  king's 
minority.  The  attempt  to  compel  her  chaplains  to  use 
the  Prayer-book  was  rendered  unsuccessful  by  the  in- 
terposition of  the  Emperor  Charles  V.,  who  vowed  that 
"  his  cousin  should  not  be  worse  treated  by  English 
councillors  than  his  aunt  had  been  by  an  English 
sovereign."  When  it  was  understood  that  the  Council 
must  suffer  Mary's  superstition  or  go  to  war,  the  Re- 
forming bishops,  Cranmer,  Eidley,  and  Poynet,  advised 
toleration  as  the  less  of  two  evils.  The  annoyances 
sustained  by  the  princess  in  the  years  1550-51  were 
nevertheless  sufficient  to  inspire  her  with  that  strong 
hatred  of  the  Eeforming  party  which  asserted  itself  so 
fearfully  five  years  later.  "  She  had  accepted  the 
alterations  introduced  by  her  father,  and  had  nothing 
else  intervened  she  might  have  maintained  as  a  sove- 
reign what  she  had  honestly  admitted  as  a  subject. 
Her  own  persecution  only,  and  the  violent  changes 
enforced  by  the  doctrinal  reformers,  taught  her  to 
believe  that,  apart  from  Eome,  there  was  no  security  for 
orthodoxy."  ^ 

suppres-  Somerset    had   repealed    the    ancient   laws    a2:ainst 

sion  of  ■■-  ^ 

heretics.  heresy  simply  to  gratify  the  Protestants,  the  only 
party  that  could  be  taxed  with  heretical  opinions.  But 
so  grossly  profane  and  violent  was  the  extreme  section 
of  this  school  during  the  Eucharistic  controversy,  that 
the  Protector  was  forced  to  build  again  what  he  had 

1  Froude,  History,  vol.  v.  p.  368. 


EDWARD    VI.  229 

destroyed,  and  coerce  his  unmanageable  allies  by  puni-  chap. 
tive  enactments.  Hooper  and  Calvin  both  attest  the  _!JL_ 
turbulence  of  the  sectarians.  "  How  dangerously 
England  is  afflicted  by  heresies  God  only  knows, 
Hooper  writes  to  BuUinger.  .  .  .  There  are  wretches 
who  dare,  in  their  conventicles,  not  only  to  deny  that 
Christ  is  our  Saviour,  but  to  call  that  Blessed  Child  a 
mischief-maker  and  a  deceiver."  By  Calvin  Somerset 
was  advised  to  inflict  the  severest  penalties  on  "the 
fantastical  people  who,  under  colour  of  the  Gospel, 
would  set  all  to  confusion,"  no  less  than  on  the  papists. 
To  Somerset's  credit  it  may  be  recorded  that  the  cruel 
policy  suggested  by  the  gloomy  Genevan  was  not  ac- 
cepted. His  Heresy  Commission  only  compelled  certain  joan 
anabaptists  to  abjure  and  carry  faggots  at  S,  Paul's, 
and  imprisoned  Joan  Bocher.  This  unhappy  person 
preached  an  opinion  concerning  Christ's  human  nature 
somewhat  akin  to  Docetism.  She  was  tried  in  April, 
1549,  by  a  commission  which  included  Cranmer  and 
Latimer,  and  was  delivered  over  to  the  secular  power. 
She  was  burnt  at  Smithfield  about  a  year  afterwards, 
by  order  of  the  Council,  under  a  writ  de  liceretico  comhu- 
rendo.  The  story  about  Edward  reluctantly  signing  her 
death-warrant  appears  to  be  one  of  Foxe's  myths.  The 
signatures  of  the  Council  were  sufficient  for  the  warrant, 
and  there  is  no  reason  to  believe  that  the  king's  signa- 
ture was  even  asked  for.  The  fate  of  Joan  Bocher  was 
shared  in  1551  by  George  von  Paris,  a  Dutchman  of 
Arian  opinions. 

Erom  what  has  been  already  stated  it  will  be  under- 
stood that  the  Government  of  this  reign  systematically 
stocked  the  episcopate  with  divines  of  the  New  Learn- 
ing. If  a  Reformer  could  not  be  found  with  any  claim 
to  distinction,  the  bishopric  was  left  vacant,  and  its 


230  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

revenues  were  appropriated.     We  have  already  men- 
tioned  the   appointment   of    the   infamous   Poynet   to 
Appoint-      Winchester.      In    July,    1550,    Gloucester   received   a 
Hooper  to    nomination  almost  as  unfortunate.      Dr.  Hooper  was 
Gloucester.  ^  ginccre  Christian,  who  had  lived  among  the  conti- 
nental Calvinists,  and  so  contracted  opinions  at  variance 
with  Anglicanism,    even   as   represented    by   Cranmer 
and  Ridley.     He  was   recommended   to  the  bishopric 
by   Northumberland,    who   thought   to   humour    King 
Edward's   Protestant    proclivities.      The    consecration 
would,  of  course,  be  conducted  according  to  the  ordinal 
recently  sanctioned  by  Parliament.     The  OfSce  which 
was  to  be  used  was  substantially  that  in  our  present 
Prayer-book.      It  included,   however,   a  more   impres- 
sive ritual.     The  vestment  to  be  worn  by  the  bishop 
was  a  chimere  of  scarlet ;    a  Bible  was  to  be  laid  on 
his  neck,  and  a  pastoral  staff  placed  in  his  hand,  at 
the  consecration.      Moreover,   the  oath   of  supremacy 
contained  the  words,    "by  God,    the   saints,    and  the 
HisPuritan  Holy    Gospel."      Tlicsc    things    were    an    offence    to 

S  C  1*U.T)  1  f^  S 

Hooper.  The  oath  was  altered  in  deference  to  his 
argument  that  men  ought  to  swear  by  God  only; 
but  still  Hooper  was  not  satisfied.  He  considered  it 
wrong  that  a  bishop  should  have  a  distinctive  dress ; 
he  would  not  "  be  made  a  magpie  of,"  he  disliked  the 
tonsure,  he  would  not  have  the  Bible  on  his  neck. 
The  surplice  riots  and  other  anti-ritual  movements 
in  our  own  days  have  taught  us  that  there  is 
a  deep  significance  in  the  adoption  or  rejection  of  a 
vestment  or  a  piece  of  religious  ceremonial.  It  is  im- 
possible, therefore,  for  us  to  call  Hooper's  objections 
puerile.  Eather  should  we  argue  that  he  had  no  ap- 
preciation of  the  dignity  of  the  episcopate,  and  ought 
not    to   have   been   in    the    Anglican  ministry   at   all. 


EDWARD    VI.  .231 

It  must  in  fairness  be  added  that  the  bishopric  was  chap. 
thrust  iipon  him  by  Northumberland,  unasked  for,  if  _1^ 
not  against  his  wish.  What  was  really  perhaps  a 
question  of  fundamental  principle  was  now  narrowed 
to  the  petty  issue  of  a  ritual  dispute.  Cranmer,  with 
unwonted  firmness,  insisted  on  Hooper's  conformity. 
Ridley  also  on  this  occasion  appeared  on  the  side  of 
decency  and  order.  Hooper,  however,  continued  to 
fulminate  against  chimere,  cope,  and  surplice.  He  ap- 
pears to  have  had  the  support  of  Northumberland  and 
the  king.  An  appeal,  however,  to  Bucer,  the  Protestant 
luminary,  only  elicited  the  unfeeling  reply  that  a  vest- 
ment was  a  trivial  matter  at  a  time  when  hypocrisy 
and  infidelity  were  rampant.  Zeal,  he  urged,  should 
rather  be  directed  to  "  the  staying  of  sacrilege  and  the 
providing  decent  ministers  in  the  parishes."  To  a  like 
effect  spoke  Peter  Martyr.  Still  Hooper  was  not  con- 
vinced. He  denounced  the  retention  of  Catholic  usages 
from  the  pulpit  till  he  was  inhibited  from  preaching ; 
he  then  asserted  his  sentiments  in  a  "  Confession  of 
Faith,"  in  which  the  Council  was  treated  disrespectfully. 
The  Council  asked  Cranmer  to  deal  with  him.  The  He  is  im- 
primate  cuuld  find  no  better  persuasive  than  incarce-  cranmer 
ration.  The  "  first  Puritan  confessor"  remained  in  the  firms. '^^^ 
Fleet  prison  for  nearly  two  months ;  he  then  tendered 
his  submission,  and  was  consecrated  in  the  objectionable 
vestments  on  March  8,  1551. 

Cranmer  was  now  engaged  in  drawing  up  a  code  of  The  Forty 
Articles  which  should  determine  the  bounds  within  Articles, 
which  public  teaching  should  be  exercised.  He  was  not 
so  presumptuous  as  to  think  of  impo:5ing  on  the  Church 
a  new  "Confession  of  Faith;"  the  code  was  merely 
intended  to  check  pulpit  vagaries.  The  Forty-two 
Articles  of  Cranmer  were  reshaped  in  the  time  of  Arch- 


232  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

CHAP,  bishop  Parker,  and  survive  in  that  syllabus  of  Thirty- 
_J.^^  nine  Articles  to  which  every  preacher  of  our  Church 
still  makes  assent.  It  has  frequently  been  attempted 
to  raise  this  document  to  the  dignity  of  a  Creed  or 
Confession;  such,  however,  was  not  the  purpose  either 
of  Cranmer  or  Parker.  We  may  add  that  it  will  be 
an  evil  day  for  our  Church  when  Articles  which  are 
clearly  designed  only  as  a  secui'ity  against  pulpit  ex- 
travagance, shall  be  misinterpreted  as  the  gauge  of 
faith  for  all  members  of  the  Anglican  Communion. 
The  Articles  were  concessory  in  character — so  worded 
that  clergymen  who  inclined  to  Calvinism  might  not 
be  forced  to  vacate  their  pulpits.  To  both  extremes  of 
error,  however,  they  presented  an  uncompromising 
front.  Some  are  directly  aimed  at  the  extravagances  of 
mediaeval  Romanism,  more  at  the  heresies  of  sixteenth- 
century  Protestantism.  In  compiling  these  Articles 
Cranmer  was  probably  much  influenced  by  the  writings 
of  Archbishop  Hermann  and  Melancthon.  Of  his 
brother  clergy  he  selected  Eidley  to  assist  him.  The 
rights  of  Convocation  were  in  this,  as  in  other  matters, 
treated  by  Cranmer  with  scant  deference.  The  Church's 
representatives  were  not  summoned  to  accept  the  new 
formulary  till  after  it  had  been  authorized  by  the 
king  in  Council.  The  Articles  were  published  in  May, 
1553 ;  the  bishops  were  charged  to  see  that  their  clergy 
subscribed  them. 

The  following  analysis  will  show  the  student  how 
the  Articles  of  1553  differ  from  those  to  which  the 
clergy  now  declare  assent : — 

The  Forty-two  Articles  included  seven  which  were  omitted 
in  1563,  viz.  Art.  X.,  *'  Of  Grace,"— showing  that  no  man  can 
attribute  his  sinfulness  to  the  constraining  influence  of  predesti- 
nation ;  Art.  XVI.,  "  Of  Blasphemy  against  the  Holy  Ghost," 


EDWARD    VI.  233 

— which  is  defined  as  wilful  and  malicious  resistance  to  the  chap. 
impulses  of  conscience ;  Art.  XIX.,  "  All  men  are  bound  to  ^x^ 
keep  the  precepts  of  the  Moral  Law/'  a  part  of  which  Article 
is  retained  in  our  Art.  VII. ;  Art.  XXXIX.,  "  The  Eesurrection 
of  the  Dead  is  not  passed  already  ;  "  Art.  XL.,  "  The  Souls  of 
men  deceased  do  neither  slumber  nor  perish  with  their  bodies ; " 
Art.  XLL,  "  Of  the  Millenarians," — declaring  the  notion  of  a 
millennium  to  be  a  Jewish  fable  ;  Art.  XLIL,  "  All  men  not  to 
be  saved  at  the  last," — intended  to  confute  such  as  limited  the 
duration  of  future  punishment. 

Instead  of  these  the  following  four  were  inserted  in  1563  : — 
Art.  v.,  "  Of  the  Holy  Ghost ; "  Art.  XIL,  "  Of  Good  Works ; " 
Art.  XXIX.,  "  Of  the  Wicked  which  eat  not  the  Body  of  Christ 
in  the  Lord's  Supper ; "  Art.  XXX.,  "  Of  Communion  in  both 
kinds." 

In  some  of  the  Articles  which  are  common  to  both  formula- 
ries important  differences  may  be  discovered.  Our  references 
are  to  the  numbering  of  the  Thirty-nine.  Art.  II.  had  not  the 
words  "  begotten  from  everlasting  of  the  Father,  the  very  and 
eternal  God."  The  spread  of  Arian  opinions  among  the  Pro- 
testants induced  Archbishop  Parker  to  add  this  clause  in  1563. 
Art.  YI.  did  not  include  the  catalogue  of  Old  Testament 
Books.  Art,  XL  did  not  define  "justification,"  but  merely 
referred  to  the  Homily.  Art.  XX.  had  not  the  clause,  "  The 
Church  bath  power  to  decree  llites  or  Ceremonies,  and  autho- 
rity in  Controversies  of  Faith."  Art.  XXIV.  did  not  condemn 
"  ministering  in  a  tongue  not  understanded,"  in  such  strong 
terms.  Art.  XXVIII.  differed,  perhaps,  rather  in  phraseology 
than  doctrine.  It  had  not  the  clause,  "  The  Body  of  Christ  is 
given,  taken,  and  eaten  .  .  .  only  after  a  heavenly  and  spiritual 
manner,"  but  it  had  a  statement  as  to  the  impossibility  of 
Christ's  natural  body  being  simultaneously  in  more  places  than 
one,  and  in  confutation  of  the  Transubstantiationists  it  denied 
"a  real  and  corporal  Presence,  as  they  phrase  it."  Art.  XXXV. 
necessarily  said  nothing  about  the  Second  Book  of  Homilies, 
which  was  not  compiled  till  Elizabeth's  reign.  In  the  place  of 
this  there  was  an  emphatic  approval  of  the  ordinal  and  the 
recently  published  "  Second  Prayer-book."  Art.  XXXVII.  bad 
not  its  explanation  of  the  royal  supremacy  in  matters  ecclesi- 


234  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

CHAP,      astical,  and  instead  thereof  was  a  statement,  "  The  King  of 
IX.        England  is,  after  Christ,  the   supreme   head   on  earth  of  the 
Church  of  England  and  Ireland." 


The 


A  committee  of  Convocation  sanctioned  in  the  same 
c^t°'^k^^'^^  year  a  Catechism,  composed  chiefly  by  Poynet,  the 
disreputable  divine  who  had  succeeded  to  Gardiner's 
bishopric.  This  work  gives  an  exposition  of  the  Ten 
Commandments  and  the  Creed,  together  with  a  para- 
phrase of  the  Lord's  Prayer,  and  some  other  forms  of 
devotion.  It  says  little  more  about  the  sacraments,  than 
that  they  are  two  in  number,  and  that  it  is  a  part  of  a 
true  Christian's  duty  to  use  them.  Poynet's  Catechism 
was  the  basis  of  Nowel's  larger  work,  a  Catechism  of 
a  Puritanical  and  Calvinistic  type,  from  the  infliction  of 
which,  by  authority  of  Convocation,  the  Church  nar- 
rowly escaped  under  Elizabeth.  The  Forty-two  Articles 
were  published,  bound  up  in  one  volume,  with  Poynet's 
Catechism. 
The  Second  But  the  uiost  important  production  of  the  last  years 
boor''"  of  this  reign  was  the  Second  Prayer-book,  which  an 
"  Act  of  Uniformity  "  ordered  to  be  used  after  Novem- 
ber 1,  1552.  The  continental  divines  had  impugned 
the  Prayer-Pook  of  1549  in  no  measured  terms,  and 
Bucer  and  Peter  Martyr  drew  up,  at  Cranmer's  request, 
a  report  of  its  most  prominent  faults.  Though  this 
report  was  not  followed  in  the  subsequent  revision,^  the 
modifications  now  effected  in  the  Communion  Office  were 

1  We  have  already  remarked  that  Cranmer  had  learnt  to  distrust  these  captious 
foreign  Protestants.  His  language,  in  a  letter  to  the  Council  with  reference  to 
this  proposed  revision  of  the  Prayer-book,  is  remarkable  :  "  I  trust  ye  will  not  be 
moved  with  these  glorious  and  unquiet  spirits,  which  can  like  nothing  but  that  is 
after  their  own  fancy  ;  and  cease  not  to  make  trouble  when  things  be  most  quiet 
■  and  in  good  order.  If  such  men  should  be  heard,  although  the  book  were  made 
every  year  anew,  yet  it  should  not  lack  faults  in  their  opinion."  The  verdict  of 
the  foreign  Protestants  when  the  Prayer-book  of  1552  was  issued  fully  justified 
Cranmer's  anticipations. 


EDWARD    Vr.  235 

doubtless  attributable  to  Protestant  influences.    Cranmer      chap. 
had  passed,  at  the  beginning  of  the  reign,  from  transub-        ^^• 
stantiation  to  consubstantiation.     In  1550  he  had  aban- 
doned the  Lutheran  dogma  and  accepted  that  view  of 
the  Eucharist  which  he  maintained  consistently  hence- 
forward.     The  "  Defence   of   the    True   and  Catholic 
Doctrine  of  the  Sacrament,"  which  he  published  in  that 
year,  asserts  that  there  is  a  real  sjnritual  presence  con- 
veyed to  the  believer,  but  discards  many  of  the  dogmas 
which  mediaeval  theology  had  built  upon  this  premise. 
The  change  of  "  substance,"  the  material  or  corporeal  cranmers 
Presence,  even  the  sacrificial  efficacy  of  the  Eucharist,  modifiS 
and  the  receiving  of  Christ  by  unworthy  partakers, 
are  impugned  in  this  treatise.     Cranmer  takes,  in  the 
main,  the  same  line  as  the  writers  who  argued  against 
transubstantiation  when  first  that  doctrine  was  broached. 
The   arguments   of  Peter  Martyr  and  of  Kidley,  the 
latter  of  whom  made  him  acquainted  with  the  so-called 
"  Book  of  Bertram,"   John   Scotus's    treatise    against 
transubstantiation,  are  said  to  have  effected  this  change 
in  the  primate's  opinions.      Eidley  had  probably  not 
halted  here,  but  had  embraced  views  akin  to  those  of 
the  sacramentaries  before  the  publication  of  the  Second 
Prayer-book.     For  the  changes  introduced  in  the  Com- 
munion Service  ot   this  Second  Prayer-book  Cranmer 
and  Eidley  were  mainly  responsible,  and  the  influence 
of  the  latter  appears  unfortunately  to  have  overridden 
that  of  the  more  conservative  primate.     Not  only  was  -crnfor- 
much  that  was  beautiful  in  the  way  of  ritual  expunged,  ciiang-es  m 
but  John  a  Lasco's  sacramentarian  formulae,  "  Take  and  Son  office, 
eat  this  in  remembrance,"  "  Drink  this  in  remembrance," 
now    accompanied   the   presentation   of    the    elements 
instead   of    those   which    asserted    the   reality   of  the 
Saviour's  Presence. 


236  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

CHAP.  The  "  Act  of  Uniformity  "  whicli  enforced  the  use  of 
_J3__  this  Second  Prayer-book  was  passed  in  April,  1552.  It 
was  so  worded  as  to  avoid  manifest  disparagement  of  the 
First  Prayer-book,  and  accounts  for  the  new  Office  on 
the  ground  that  "  divers  doubts  and  disputes  had  arisen 
as  to  the  way  in  which  the  book  was  to  be  used."  It 
provided  penalties  of  a  less  severe  character  than  those 
of  the  first  Act.  Happily  the  inaccuracy  of  the  edition, 
and  the  king's  anxiety  to  make  further  concessions  to 
Protestantism,  suggested  a  suppression  of  this  book 
before  the  date  when  its  use  became  compulsory.  It 
Fateoftiie  ^g^g    ^q   comc   iuto   use    on  November    1,  1552.      But 

Second  ' 

Prayer.       before  the  end  of  September  there  appeared  an  Order 

Ijook. 

in  Council  forbidding  the  issue  of  more  copies.  The 
illness  of  the  king  delayed  the  j^roposed  alterations ; 
on  July  6,  1553,  he  died,  and  nothing  more  was 
heard  of  the  Second  Prayer-book  till  the  accession 
of  Elizabeth,  who  vainly  tried  to  restore  the  Liturgy  of 
1549.  A  compromise  appears  to  have  been  effected 
with  the  revising  commissioners.  The  ancient  formulae 
of  administration  appeared  in  1552  in  conjunction  with 
those  of  John  a  Lasco,  but  the  Communion  Office  was 
imperfect  in  the  matter  of  ritual,  and  the  absence  of 
many  venerable  usages  throughout  attested  the  influ- 
ence of  the  "Vandal"  Liturgy.  It  was  not  till  1662 
that  concessions  were  made  in  these  respects  to  the 
Catholic  school. 
The  We  give  here  a  resume  of  the  most  important  changes 

thSiSyer-^  made  in  1552,  noticing  how  far  these  were  modified  by 
^°°^     ,     the  revisions  of  1559  and  1662.-^ 

compared. 

'  That  of  1604  introduced  only  two  important  changes.  Lay  Baptism  ■was  no 
longer  sanctioned,  and  the  Catecliism  received  the  addition  of  Dr.  Overall's 
questions  and  answers  on  the  sacraments  :  see  chap.  xiii. 


EDWARD    VL  237 

1.  In  the  Morning  service  the  Scripture  sentences,  "  Dearly       chap. 
beloved   Brethren,"   Confession,   and   Absolution   were    added.         ix. 
This  service  had  in  1549  opened  with  the  Lord's  Prayer,  as  did 

the  Evening  service  until  1662. 

2.  In  the  Communion  Office  the  Ten  Commandments  were 
added.  No  prayers  or  oblations  for  the  dead  were  prescribed ;  the 
prayer  "  for  the  whole  state  of  Christ's  Church  "  received  in  its 
title  the  significant  addition  "  militant  here  on  earth,"  and  the 
words  which  commemorate  the  faithful  departed  were  not  added 
till  1662.  The  prescription  to  add  to  the  wine  "  a  little  pure 
and  clean  water  "  was  omitted  from  the  rubric.  At  administra- 
tion the  second  only  of  the  two  clauses  now  in  use  was  to  be 
employed  in  the  case  of  both  elements.  The  first  clauses  were 
reinserted  in  1559.  The  directions  as  to  the  priest's  manipula- 
tion of  the  elements  during  the  act  of  consecration  had  also  dis- 
appeared. These  were  not  restored  till  1662.  The  rubric  of 
1549  had  ordered  "unleavened  bread."  That  of  1552  says  that 
"  it  shall  suffice  that  the  bread  be  such  as  is  usual  to  be  eaten 
with  other  meats."  This  was  supplemented  in  1559  by  an 
"  Injunction  "  ordering  the  use  of  wafer  bread,  "  made  and  formed 
plain,  without  any  figure  thereupon."  Lastly,  in  1662  came 
the  present  rubric.  Tins  in  order  to  take  away  from  the 
Puritans  "all  occasion  of  dissension  and  superstition"  allows  the 
alternative,  scil.  "it  shall  suffice^  that  the  bread  be  such  as  is 
usual  to  be  eaten,  but  the  best  and  purest  wheat  bread  that  con- 
veniently may  be  gotten."  The  rubric  apologizing  for  the  act 
of  kneeling  first  appears  in  1552.  It  was  omitted,  as  derogatory 
to  the  dignity  of  the  Sacrament,  in  1559,  but  restored,  for  the 
instruction  of  the  Puritans,  in  1662.  The  rubric  directing  the 
Minister  to  read  the  Lord's  Prayer  and  Collect  standing  on  the 
"  north  side "  (see  p.  227)  also  dates  from  1552. 

3.  The  Office  of  Baptism  no  longer  prescribed  a  form  of  adjura- 
tion or  exorcism,  nor  the  ancient  practice  of  trine  immersion, 
nor  the  investiture  of  the  baptized  with  the  white  dress  called 
the  chrisom.  Neither  of  the  two  first  Prayer-books  had  any 
prayer  for  the  sanctification  of  the  water.  This  deficiency  was 
met  in  1662  by  the  insertion  of  the  prayer  "  Almighty  and 
everlasting  God." 

'  A  rubric  the  purport  of  which  was  discovered  by  the  Judicial  Committee  of 
the  Privy  Council  in  1871  to  be  a  prohibition  of  wafer  bread. 


238 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


4.  In  Confirmation  the  prayer  at  tlie  laying  on  of  hands  was 
introduced.  In  the  Prayer-book  of  1549,  instead  of  a  prayer, 
there  was  this  address :  "  N.,  I  sign  thee  with  the  sign  of  the 
cross  and  lay  my  hands  upon  thee,  In  the  name,  etc." 

5.  In  the  "  Solemnization  of  Matrimony  "  the  giving  of  gold 
and  silver  with  the  ring  was  no  longer  prescribed.  The  rubric 
still  ordered  the  reception  of  Holy  Communion  on  the  very  day 
of  marriage.     It  was  not  altered  to  its  present  form  till  1662. 

6.  In  the  "  Visitation  of  the  Sick  "  the  formula  at  anointing 
the  sick  person  "  upon  the  forehead  or  breast  "  was  omitted,  and 
the  practice  no  longer  prescribed.  In  other  parts  of  the  service 
there  were  several  unimportant  verbal  alterations  made  both 
now  and  in  1662. 

7.  In  the"  Burial  of  the  Dead  "  the  Psalms  of  1549  (Psalms 
cxvi.,  cxxxix.,  cxlvi.)  were  omitted,  and  it  was  not  till  1662  that 
their  place  was  supplied  by  Psalms  xxxix.  and  xc.  The  portion  of 
the  service  following  the  Lesson  took  its  present  form.  In  1549 
there  had  been  a  prayer  for  the  forgiveness  and  acceptance  of 
the  departed  soul,  followed  by  a  celebration  of  Holy  Communion 
with  special  Collect,  Epistle,  and  Gospel. 

8.  The  ordinal  attached  to  the  Prayer-book  of  1549  had  been 
altered  in  deference  to  Puritan  scruples.  The  Office  incorporated 
in  the  Prayer-book  of  1552  was  almost  identical  with  our 
present  Ordination  Service.  Besides  appeals  to  saints  and 
evangelists,  certain  sjaiibolical  practices  had  been  omitted, 
viz.  the  laying  a  Bible  on  the  neck  of  a  bishop  and  placing  a 
pastoral  staff  in  his  hands,  and  the  delivering  of  a  chalice  and 
bread  at  the  ordination  of  a  priest. 

9.  The  Vestment  or  Ornament  rubric  at  the  beginning  of  the 
book  now  ordered  that  the  minister  should  use  "  neither  alb, 
vestment,  nor  cope,"  but  that,  being  a  bishop,  he  should  wear  a 
rochet,  and  being  a  priest  or  deacon,  a  surplice.  This  restriction 
was  abolished  in  1559,  and  the  rubric  henceforth  ordered  (as  it 
does  still)  the  use  of  such  vestments  as  were  in  use  by  authority 
of  Parliament  in  the  second  year  of  Edward  VI. 


This  Prayer-book  of  1552  might  well  be  regarded  as 
an  extravagant  concession  to  the  destructive  faction. 
After  the  manner  of   such  concessions,  it  gave  most 


EDWARD    VI.  239 

offence  to  the  party  whose  opinions  were  deferred  to.      chap. 
The  foreign  refugees  abused  the  new  Prayer-book    as        ^^' 
virulently  as  they  had  abused  that  of  1549,  and  Calvin 
himself  aspersed  it  as  "  intolerable  stuff,"  "  intolerable 
fooleries." 

It  will  be  remembered  that  when  Henry's  ecclesi- 
astical changes  were  imminent,  an  Act  of  Parliament 
had  appointed  thirty-two  commissioners  to  undertake 
the  revision  of  ecclesiastical  "  constitutions,  ordinances, 
and  canons"  (1534).  Various  causes  had  hitherto 
hindered  the  completion  of  this  work.  In  November, 
1551,  a  new  commii<si9n  was  appointed.  It  contained 
eight  persons,  among  whom  were  the  foreigners,  Peter 
Martyr  and  John  a  Lasco,  and  was  presided  over  by 
Cranmer.  The  labours  of  this  commission  resulted  in  The 
a  work  of  Puritanical  character,  entitled  "  Eeformatio  matlo''^ 
Legum  Ecclesiasticarum."  Before  this  production  was  ^^^^'^  " 
submitted  to  Parliament  and  Convocation,  King  Edward 
had  died.  A  proposal  made  in  1571  to  give  it  legal 
authority  fell  through,  and  the  Church  thus  escaped  the 
infliction  of  a  code  which  would  have  isolated  us  both 
from  other  branches  of  the  Church  and  from  our  own 
national  traditions.  This  work  was  pretentious  in  ap- 
pearance. It  was  distributed  into  fifty-one  sections,  in 
imitation  of  Justinian's  digest  of  Eoman  law,  and  had 
an  appendix,  "  De  regulis  juris,"  corresponding  to  the 
supplementary  "  Pandects  "  of  Justinian.  Dean  Hook 
regards  this  publication  as  in  the  main  Cranmer's 
handiwork,  and  as  throwing  a  clear  light  on  the 
theological  opinions  of  the  primate  at  the  end  of 
Edward's  reign.  "  As  the  foundation  of  all  ecclesias- 
tical law  he  introduces  the  king  as  commanding  all  his 
subjects,  everywhere  and  under  every  denomination,  to 
be  Christians " — a  position  quite  in  accordance   with 


240 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


CHAP. 
IX. 


Commis- 
sion of 
search  for 
Church 
property. 


the  Erastian  character  of  Cranmer's  theology.  Those 
who  deny  fundamental  doctrines,  snch  as  that  of  the 
Blessed  Trinity,  ought,  according  to  the  "  Keformatio," 
to  be  burnt;  smaller  forms  of  heresy  should  be  visited 
by  the  magistrate  with  less  severe  penalties.  The 
*'  Eeformatio  "  treats  predestination  and  election  from  a 
Lutheran  standpoint,  despite  the  Thirty -nine  Articles, 
and  gives  to  the  Sacraments  and  to  Holy  Orders  their 
true  dignity,  despite  the  new  Prayer-book. 

The  last  incident  of  note  in  this  unhappy  reign  was 
an  attempt  to  repair  the  mischief  of  the  ultra-Pro- 
testants.   Commissioners  were  appointed  in  June,  1552, 
to  make  search  for  the  valuables  that  had  been  embezzled 
from  monasteries,  chantries,  and  colleges.     They  were 
to  leave  in  every  church  such  chalices  and  cups  and 
other   ornaments   as   they  should   think    requisite   for 
divine    service ;    the  rest  of   the    property  was  to  be 
approj)riated  to  the   Crown.     This  arrangement  com- 
pelled the  plunderers  to  disgorge,  but  to  the  increment 
of    the   Exchequer   rather   than   of   Church   revenues. 
The  episcopal  sees  had  now  nearly  all  been  robbed  by 
means    of   enforced   alienations,  and   the   clergy  were 
mostly  in  a  state  of  abject  poverty.     Numerous  parishes 
were  altogether  without  curates.     The  poor  were  un- 
friended,  the    churches   lapsing   to   decay.      Learning 
had  forsaken  the  universities.     Corruption  and  intrigue 
were  rife  at  Court.     Harsh  laws  and  heavy  taxation 
were  making  life  unendurable  to  all  but   the  minis- 
terial parasites.      Such   was   the   state  to    which  the 
Reformation  brought  England  when  it  was  conducted 
under  Protestant  auspices. 


MARY.  241 


CHAPTER  X. 

A.D.    1553-1558. 

Northumberland's  conspiracy — Its  failure — Enthusiastic  reception  of  Mary — Anti- 
Reformers  regain  influence — Disturbances  in  churches — Royal  proclamation 
issued — The  queen  negotiates  with  Rome — The  impediments  to  reunion — Mediae- 
valism  in  the  ascendant — Flight  of  the  foreign  refugees — And  of  many  English 
Reformers — Cranmer  remains — His  indiscreet  manifesto — Is  imprisoned  in  the 
Tower — Other  Reforming  bishops  share  his  fate — Parliament — The  religious 
status  of  1547  restored — Cranmer's  proceedings  in  the  divorce  case  exposed — 
Henry's  Treasons  Acts  and  Praemunires  taken  off— Convocation  reactionary — 
The  public  disputation — The  proposed  marriage  with  Philip — Protestant  de- 
nunciations— The  second  flight  of  Protestants  and  Reformers — More  royal  "  In- 
junctions " — Six  bishops  deprived — And  about  fifteen  hundred  married  priests — 
Cranmer,  Ridley,  and  Latimer  at  Oxford  —  The  disputation  in  the  schools  — 
Unfair  conduct  of  their  censors  —  Their  condemnation  —  Manifesto  of  other 
imprisoned  divines— The  queen's  religion  insulted — The  royal  marriage — More 
negotiations  with  Rome — The  bargain  concluded — Pole  returns  to  England — The 
verdict  of  England  —  The  ultra-Protestants  accountable  for  the  lapse — The 
reconciliation — Pole's  speech  —  Submission  of  the  Houses  —  Their  apology  — 
The  nation  is  absolved — The  clergy  are  absolved — They  plead  for  restoration  of 
Church  property — But  this  is  not  in  the  bond — Pole's  appeal  to  the  lay  impro- 
priator's conscience  —  Tlie  Act  —  Extends  clerical  liberties  —  But  justifies  lay 
impropriatiun — Pole's  other  concessions — The  laws  for  destruction  of  heretics 
revived— Hitherto  no  heretics  burnt— The  Marian  persecution  unintelligible — 
It  caused  the  Elizabethan  reaction — The  blame  rests  with  the  Spanish  eccle- 
siastics— Not  with  the  English  bishops — Account  of  these  ecclesiastics — Philip's 
share  in  the  matter — The  persecuting  gentry — The  first  commission — Irritation 
of  the  populace — The  three  bishops  at  Oxford — Ridlej'  and  Latimer  burnt — 
Career  of  Ridley — Career  of  Latimer — Cranmer  reserved  for  six  months— He  is 
induced  to  recant — Renounces  his  recantations — And  is  burnt — Mary  restored 
the  royal  impropriations — Elizabeth  cancelled  this  act  of  generosity — Re-estab- 
lishment of  unreformed  religion — Persecution  continues — Pole  forced  to  head 
the  persecution — The  Pope's  attack  on  Pole  resented  by  Mary — Convocation  in 
1558 — Hatred  of  Romanism — Death  of  Mary  and  many  bishops. 

The  mortal  sickness  of  Edward  warned  Nortlmmber-  Northum- 
land  that  his  day  of  power  was  drawing  to  a  close.     A  consp'imcy. 


242  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

CHAP,  desperate  expedient  siiggested  itself  as  the  only  means 
■  ^' ,_  of  averting  downfall.  Edward's  strong  religious  j)re- 
judices  might  be  so  worked  upon  that  the  throne  should 
be  bequeathed  by  a  royal  will  to  Lady  Jane  Grey, 
lately  married  to  Northumberland's  own  son,  Lord 
Guildford  Dudley.  Between  the  Lady  Jane  and  the 
succession  there  came  four  persons  :  the  Princesses  Mary 
and  Elizabeth ;  the  infant  daughter  of  Margaret,  niece 
of  Henry  VIIL,  who  had  married  James  lY.  of  Scot- 
land ;  and  Lady  Jane's  mother,  the  Duchess  of  Suffolk. 
Mary,  the  first  in  succession  according  to  Henry's  will, 
had  been  declared  a  bastard  by  an  unrepealed  Act  of 
Parliament ;  so  also  had  Elizabeth ;  the  next  claimant 
might  be  passed  over  as  an  infant;  the  duchess  was 
ready  to  waive  her  claim  in  favour  of  her  daughter. 
Henry  had  left  the  crown  by  will;  the  ministerial 
clique  assured  Edward  that  he  had  power  to  do  so  too. 
The  most  telling  argument  with  the  young  king  was, 
doubtless,  the  pronounced  Protestantism  of  the  Lady 
Jane.  Edward  disinherited  his  sisters  and  appointed 
his  cousin  his  successor.  Many  of  the  councillors  who 
attested  the  necessary  legal  instrument  did  so  under 
protest ;  the  last  and  most  reluctant  to  sign  was  Arch- 
bishop Cranmer.  On  the  death  of  Edward,  Lady  Jane 
was  proclaimed  queen  in  London,  much  against  her 
own  inclination  (July  10).  Eidley  and  the  anti-Koman 
divines  preached  in  behalf  of  her  claim. 

But  the  nation  was  wearied  of  injustices  perpetrated 
in  the  name  of  the  New  Learning ;  the  true  motive  of 
the  proceeding  was  patent  to  all,  and  Mary  at  once 
found  herself  surrounded  by  partisans.  In  ten  days 
the  scheme  had  proved  itself  futile.  Arundel,  Shrews- 
bury, Pembroke,  and  others  of  the  Council  declared  for 
Mary;    Northumberland    was    forced   to   disband    his 


MARY.  243 

troops  at  Cambridge ;  and  twenty-seven  of  the  party,      chap. 
including  Bishop  Eidley,  found  their  way  to  the  Tower.     . — ; — , 
Mary  was  only  merciless  to  offenders  in  the  matter  of 
religion.      On    the    present    occasion    she    showed    a 
clemency  which,    in    the   opinion   of   her   cousin,    the 
emperor,  outstepped  the  bounds  of  prudence.     The  lives 
of  Lacly  Jane  and  her  husband  were  spared  till  the 
insurrection  under  Wyat  in  the   following  year  made 
continued   leniency  impossible.      Justice  was   for   the 
present  satisfied  with  the  lives  of  the  arch-conspirator 
and  two  leading^  members  of  the  faction.     The  duke's 
execution  was  memorable  for  his  renunciation  on  the 
scafibld  of  those  Protestant  principles  which  he  had 
disgraced  in  office.    In  the  pros23ect  of  deliverance  from  Enthu- 
such  iniquitous  government  as  had  prevailed  since  the  reception  of 
death  of  Henry,  the  Romanist  proclivities  of  the  new  Miary. 
queen   were   condoned   by   the   vast   majority   of   her 
subjects.     Her   entry  into   London   was    greeted  with 
extraordinary   enthusiasm.       Her    popularity   did   not 
diminish   when    she  began  her  administration  by  re- 
storing the  currency  to  its  proper  value  at  her  own 
cost,  and  remitting  a  subsidy  granted  to  the  Crown  by 
the  late  Parliament. 

The  queen  had  announced  in  Suffolk    that    she  did  Anti- 
not  intend   to   coerce   her   subjects   in   the   matter   of^^^°^^®^^ 
religion.     The  change  of  dynasty,  however,  necessarily  ii^uence. 
altered  the  fortunes  of  the    two  parties.     The  release 
of  the  five   incarcerated   prelates,    Gardiner,    Tonsstal, 
Bonner,  Day,  and  Heath,  was  a  mere  act  of  justice.     A  • 
committee    was    appointed    to    examine    the    charges 
against  these  prisoners.     It  pronounced  that  their  de- 
position was  unjust.     They  accordingly  recovered  pos- 
session  of  their   respective   sees.      Gardiner   and   the 
Duke   of  Norfolk   were   soon    members    of  the   Privy 


244 


ECCLESIA  ANGLICANA. 


CHAP. 
X. 


Council,  wherein,  from  motives  of  polic}'',  were  retained 
most  of  those  in  Edward's  Council  who  had  not  declared 
for  Jane.  Cranmer  was,  of  course,  in  disgrace.  He 
was  permitted,  however,  to  read  the  funeral  service 
of  the  Praj^er-book  over  King  Edward  in  Westminster 
Abbey,  while  Gardiner  celebrated  the  mass  of  the 
unreformed  faith  in  the  Tower  chapel.  This  concession 
to  the  Eeformed  party  was  secured  by  the  arguments 
of  the  emperor,  who  advised  that  all  religious  changes 
should  be  effected  with  the  greatest  caution.  After 
the  obsequies,  the  archbishop  received  an  order  to 
confine  himself  to  his  house  at  Lambeth. 

A  decided  collision  between  the  two  schools  of 
thought  was,  however,  inevitable.  On  the  one  hand, 
the  conservative  clergy  had  in  many  places  hastened 
to  restore  the  ancient  rites,  with  no  warrant  but  the 
well-known  religious  proclivity  of  the  throne.  The 
Calvinists,  on  the  other  hand,  reading  less  accurately 
the  signs  of  the  times,  vented  their  dissatisfaction  in 
those  acts  of  turbulence  which,  in  the  recent  reign, 
had  passed  as  indications  of  godly  zeal.  Some  London 
Protestants  raised  a  riot  while  mass  was  being  cele- 
brated at  a  church  in  the  horse-market.  A  more 
serious  affair  took  place  at  S.  Paul's  Cross,  while 
Bourne,  one  of  the  royal  chaplains,  was  preaching. 
Bourne  indiscreetly  complained  of  the  religious  inno- 
vations of  Edward's  reign,  especially  dwelling  on  the 
unjust  treatment  experienced  by  Bishop  Bonner.  A 
tumult  ensued,  in  the  course  of  which  a  fanatic  hurled 
a  dagger,  which  struck  one  of  the  columns  of  the 
pulpit.  The  preacher  with  difficulty  escaped,  under 
the  protection  of  Bradford  and  Eogers,  two  of  the  Re- 
formed clergy.  The  queen  perceived  that  immediate 
steps  must  be  taken  to  enforce  order.     Following  the 


MARY.  245 

example  of  her  two  predecessors,  she  adopted  the 
expedient  of  silencing  the  pulpits  by  royal  injunction. 
In  her  proclamation  she  complained  of  the  use  of  "the  Royaipro- 

^  '^  ...        clamation 

devilish  terms  of  papist  and  heretic,"  and  similar  in-  issued. 

dications  of  religious  animosity.     She  declared  plainly 

that,  for  her  part,  she  intended  to  cling  to  the  religion 

in  which  she  had  been  brought  up,  and  that  she  would 

gladly  see  her  subjects  inclined  thereto.     Nevertheless, 

"  her   Highness   minds   not   to   compel    any   her  said 

subjects  thereunto,  until  such  time  as  further  order  by 

common    consent   may   be   taken    therein."      For  the 

present   the   proclamation    required  a  special  licence, 

not  only  for  preaching,  but  also,  since  these  had  been 

used  as  a  means  of  insulting  the  old  ritual,  for  plays 

and  interludes.      Meanwhile,    Mary   was   engaged    in  Theaueen 

negotiates 

secret  negotiations  with  Rome.  Julius  III.  had  de-  witiiiionie. 
spatched  his  chamberlain  Commendone  to  England,  to 
pave  the  way  for  the  restoration  of  the  papal  supremacy 
in  England.  The  envoy  passed  himself  oft'  in  London 
as  an  Italian  gentleman,  who  had  come  over  in  search 
of  a  property  recently  bequeathed  by  a  kinsman.  He 
was  thus  enabled  to  study  unobserved  the  position  and 
prospects  of  the  two  religious  parties.  The  queen 
admitted  him  to  interviews  which  were  kept  secret 
even  from  her  confidential  adviser,  Renard,  the 
emperor's  ambassador.  The  prospect  was  not  yet 
regarded  as  satisfactory  to  the  Roman  faction,  notwith- 
standing: the  o-eneral  reaction  ;  and  it  was  decided  that 
the  papal  appointment  of  Cardinal  Pole  ^  as  legate  to 

'  Cardinal  Pole,  who  plays  such  an  important  part  in  this  reign,  has  been 
mentioned  as  denouncing,  in  the  De  Unitate,  Henry's  assumption  of  ecclesiastical 
supremacy  and  the  judicial  murders  of  Sir  Thomas  More  and  Ris^hop  Fisher. 
This  worlc  caused  a  sensati  'n  on  the  Continent,  and  Pole  was  ordered  to  return  to 
England.  Wisely  disobeying,  he  secured  the  favour  of  Taul  III.,  and,  although 
not  in  priest's  orders,  was  made  a  cardinal  in  December,  1536.  He  appears  to  have 
been  mixed  up  in  all   the    foreign  conspiracies    against  Henry  VIII.    He  was 


246 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


England  slionld  as  jet  be  kept  secret.  The  two  great 
obstacles,  in  Mar3^'s  opinion,  were  that  "  the  greater 
Theim-  part  "  of  the  people  "had  a  mortal  hatred  of  the  Holy 
toreunion.  See,"  ^  and  that  the  aristocracy  were  possessed  of  eccle- 
siastical property  which  they  would  not  consent  to 
resign.  The  old  English  antipathy  to  Eoman  usurpa- 
tion Mary  was  enabled  to  surmount ;  the  more  matter- 
of-fact  arguments  of  the  holders  of  Church  property 
were  unassailable.  Eomanism  was  eventually  restored, 
on  the  distinct  understanding  that  the  Pope  winked  at 
the  spoliation  of  the  preceding  reigns. 
Mediaeval-  The  royal  proclamation  sufficiently  indicated  which 
ascendant,  side  might  transgrcss  with  impunity,  and  the  restora- 
tion of  the  Latin  mass  and  other  Eoman  Offices  went 
on  apace.  Most  religious  la3^men  were  sick  of  the 
irreverence  and  disorder  which  appeared  at  this  time 
to  be  the  necessary  concomitants  of  reformation.  The 
indiff'erent  mostly  desired  the  system  that  would  best 
enhance  the  prosperity  of  the  country,  and,  tried  by 
this  test,  the  Eeformed  cause  was  hopelessly  dis- 
paraged. Among  the  clergy  and  the  middle  classes 
alone  was  there  much  real  appreciation  of  the  religious 
benefits  of  the  Eeformation.  In  both  these  quarters 
much  would  have  to  be  unlearnt  ere  the  tide  of  public 
sympathy  could  turn  in  their  favour.  AJl  doubt  in  this 
matter  was  removed  when  the  writs  went  out  this 
autumn  for  an  election  to  Parliament.  The  writs 
named,   as  usual,  a  limited  number  of  candidates  for 


declared  an  outlaw  in  1539.  His  mother,  the  Countess  of  Salisbury,  was  executed 
shortly  afterwards.  On  the  death  ot  Henry  he  wrote  to  the  Privy  Council,  defending 
his  conduct  and  offering  to  reconcile  England  to  Rome.  With  Mary,  Pole  had 
been  intimate  from  childhood,  and  the  hope  of  gaining  her  in  marriage  is  supposed 
to  have  kept  him  a  de..con.  It  will  be  remembered  Pole  was  very  nearlv  related 
to  the  reigning  family.  His  mother  was  daughter  of  the  Duke  of  Clarence, 
brother  to  Edward  IV.,  and  first  cousin  to  Elizabeth,  the  consort  of  Henry  VII. 
'  Julius  III.  to  Pole,  Poll  Epistola;,  vol.  iv. 


MARY.  247 

eacli  constituency,  but  the  elections  of  this  reign  appear  chap. 
to  have  been  singularly  free  from  bribery  and  corruption  v  \'  . 
— as  compared,  at  least,  with  those  under  Edward  VI. 
The  body  returned  seems  to  have  fairly  represented 
the  convictions  of  the  upper  classes  on  the  religious 
question.  It  was,  as  will  be  seen,  strongly  in  favour 
of  undoing  the  Eeforraation.  It  is  not  surprising  that 
many  of  the  Reforming  teachers  now  found  their  posts 
untenable.       Oxford    became   too    hot    to    hold   Peter  I'lieriit  of 

.  ,  ,  the  foreign 

Martyr,  and  this  apostle  of  foreign  Protestantism  was  refug-ees. 
fain  to  seek  a  more  congenial  clime  under  a  safe 
conduct  from  Gardiner.  John  a  Lasco,  the  hierarch 
of  the  refugee  sectaries  in  London,  received  an  order 
to  break  up  his  congregation  and  go.  The  mayors  of 
Rye  and  Dover  were  charged  to  permit  the  exit  of  all 
such  French  Protestants  as  had  not  been  outlawed. 
The  hint  was  taken  by  many,  and  on  divers  pretexts 
several  of  the  English  Reformed  clergy  joined  this 
exodus.     In  the  course  of  the  next  two  years  hundreds  -^^^of 

*'  many 

of  our  countrymen  ^  mio;rated  to  the  continental  towns.  Eng-iisii 

T-»      1  1     /~i  Reformers. 

Strasburg,  Frankfort,  Basle  and  Geneva,  Aran  and 
Zurich,  were  the  chief  cities  of  refuge.  The  Lutherans, 
shocked  at  the  low  sacramental  views  of  the  Second 
Prayer-book,  disowned  these  English  refugees  ;  by  the 
Calvinists  and  Zuinglians  they  were  received  for  a  time 
with  open  arms.  The  spirit  of  sectarianism  soon 
interrupted  their  harmony.  Most  continued  loyal  to 
the  religious  formularies  of  Edward's  reign;  some, 
however,  were  infected  by  the  contentious  and  dis- 
orderly temper  of  their  asylums.  Goaded  by  the 
foreign    sectaries,    these    persons    discovered    in    the 

'  The  most  notable  names  among  these  refugees  are  Poynet,  Bishop  of  Win- 
chester, Barlow  of  Bath  and  Wells,  Scory  of  Chichester,  Coverdale  of  Jiseter,  and 
Bale  of  Ossory  ;  Deans  Cox,  Haddon,  Horn,  Turner,  and  Sampson  ;  Grindal,  after- 
wards primate,  Jewel,  and  Sandys. 


248 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


Cranmer 
remains. 


His 

indiscreet 
manifesto. 
Sept.  1553. 


doctrines  of  free  grace  and  predestination,  and  in  the 
use  of  forms,  habits,  and  ceremonies,  a  fertile  source  of 
discord.  The  return  of  these  emigrants,  on  the  acces- 
sion of  Elizabeth,  brought  into  England  that  snare  of 
Puritanism  which  was  destined  to  hamper  her  Church's 
future  progress. 

No  one  had  better  reasons  for  consulting  his  safety 
than  Archbishop  Cranmer.  Apart  from  his  mismanage- 
ment of  the  Eeformation,  he  was  a  doomed  man  on 
the  score  of  political  intrigues.  If  his  share  in  Nor- 
thumberland's recent  conspiracy  could  be  overlooked, 
the  part  he  had  taken  against  the  queen's  mother  could 
not.  Cranmer,  however,  thought  it  his  wisdom  or  his 
duty  to  remain  at  his  post.  He  was  summoned  and 
examined  before  the  Council  with  reference  to  Nor- 
thumberland's plot,  but  experienced  no  greater  severity 
than  an  order  to  remain  at  Lambeth.  His  own  indis- 
cretion, however,  soon  offered  a  pretext  for  sharper 
procedure.  A  personal  enemy,  Thornton,  Bishop- 
suffragan  of  Dover,  had  spread  a  rejoort  that  the  re- 
storation of  the  mass  at  Canterbury  Cathedral  had  the 
primate's  sanction.  The  archbishop  could  not  content 
himself  with  a  plain  denial  of  the  story.  There 
appeared  a  manifesto  as  objectionably  intemperate  as 
any  of  his  attacks  on  Gardiner  in  the  palmy  days  of 
Edward  YI.  It  was  not  he,  says  the  primate,  "  but 
a  false,  flattering,  lying,  and  dissembling  monk,"  who 
had  restored  the  mass  at  Canterbury.  "  The  devil," 
he  observes,  "now  endeavours  to  restore  the  Latin 
satisfactory  masses,  a  thing  of  his  own  intention  and 
device.  .  .  .  The  mass  discovers  a  plain  contradiction 
to  antiquity  and  the  inspired  writings,  and  is  stuffed 
over  and  above  with  many  horrid  blasphemies.  .  .  . 
As  the   devil   is  a  liar  and  the  father  of  1}  ing,  so  he 


MARY.  249 

has  now  stirred  up  his  servants  to  persecute  Christ  chap. 
and  His  true  religion,"  It  is  only  fair  to  Cranmer  < — ; — , 
to  surmise  that  these  unseasonable  and  offensive  de- 
nunciations may  not  all  have  been  intended  for  publi- 
cation. An  officious  friend,  Scory,  Bishop  of  Chichester, 
saw  the  manifesto  preparing  in  the  primate's  house, 
transcribed  it,  and  without  permission  gave  it  general 
circulation.  But  it  was  impossible  for  Cranmer  to  dis- 
own it,  or  for  the  queen  to  overlook  the  insult  to  her 
relio-ion.  On  September  8  the  primate  found  himself  is impri- 
in  the  Tower,  on  a  charge  of  treason  by  complicity  Tower, 
with  Northumberland,  aggravated  "  by  spreading  sedi- 
tious bills  and  moving  tumults  to  the  disquiet  of  the 
State."  On  November  13  he  was  brought  to  trial  for 
his  share  in  Lady  Jane's  usurpation :  he  expressed 
penitence,  and  was  pardoned  on  this  count.  The 
queen,  however,  relegated  him  to  prison,  and  refused 
his  request  that  he  might  address  her  on  religions 
topics.  It  soon  became  apparent  that  the  prelates  of 
the  Old  Learning  had  vacated  their  prisons  in  favour 
of  their  Eeformed  brethren.  Eidley  was  already  in 
the  Marshalsea  for  turbulent  preaching ;  Hooper  and 
Coverdale  were  committed  to  the  Fleet  on  the  same 
charge ;  Latimer  was  brought  before  the  Council,  and 
appears  to  have  given  offence  by  his  characteristic 
bluntness  of  speech.  He  was  imprisoned  in  the  Tower 
for  "seditious  demeanour."  To  the  Tower  also  went  other 
Holgate,  Archbishop  of  York,  a  Eeforming  prelate  of  ^^^°„^^^^ 
a  very  different  stamp,  whose  morals  were  as  bad  as 
Bishop  Poynet's,  and  whose  nefarious  jobbings  with 
the  late  Governments  had  seriously  injured  his  see. 
It  may  be  noticed  that,  after  Cranmer's  attainder,  the 
see  of  Canterbury  was  declared  void,  although  he  was 
not    formally    degraded     till    1556.      In   the    interim 


share  his 
fate. 


250 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


CHAP. 
X. 

Parliament. 


the  archiepiscopal  jurisdiction    was    exercised  by  the 
commissioners  of  the  dean  and  chapter. 

We  have  mentioned  the  election  of  this  autumn  and 
the  return  of  a  Parliament  opposed  to  Protestantism. 
The  session  opened,  as  in  olden  time,  with  a  solemn 
Mass  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  The  Council  broached  a 
scheme  for  repealing  all  Acts  of  the  two  last  reigns 
bearing  on  religion,  and  thus  precipitately  restoring 
the  papal  supremacy.  But  it  became  plain  that  such 
retrogression  would  not  be  acceptable  to  the  Lower 
House.  What  this  body  desired  was  the  Eeformation 
as  Henry  left  it,  i.e.  Catholicism  minus  the  Pope  and 
plus  Church  spoil.  This  standard  was  regained  by 
means  of  a  bill  for  regulating  public  worship.  The 
bill  repealed  all  the  religious  measures  of  Edward's 
reign,  denounced  the  Eeformed  Liturgy  as  "  a  new 
thing  imagined  and  devised  by  a  few  of  singular 
opinions,"  and  ordered  the  re-establishment,  after  De- 
cember 20,  1553,  of  "all  such  divine  service  and 
administration  of  the  sacraments  which  were  most 
commonly  used  in  the  last  year  of  Henry  VIII." 
Only  about  a  third  of  the  Lower  House  oflered  oppo- 
sition to  these  measures.  By  another  bill  the  legitimacy 
of  the  queen  was  established.  The  plain  truth  re- 
specting the  divorce  was  now  for  the  first  time  pub- 
lished with  authority.  The  bill  declared  how  the 
proceedings  universities  abroad  and  at  home  had  been  bribed  and 

m  tlie 

divorce        menaced ;   how  "  Thomas   Cranmer,  then  newly  made 

case 

exposed.  Arclibishop  of  Canterbury,  most  ungodly,  and  against 
all  laws  of  equity  and  conscience,"  called  the  case  before 
him  ex  officio;  and  how,  "taking  his  foundation  partly 
from  his  own  unadvised  judgment  of  the  Scripture,' 
and  partly  from  the  pretended  testimonies  of  the 
universities,  and  partly  "  from  bare  and  most  untrue 


The 

relig-ious 
status  of 
1547 
restored. 


Crannier's 


MARY.  251 

conjectures,"  he  proceeded  to  pronounce  the  divorce,      chap. 
"  without  admitting  or  hearing  anything  that  could     ^^J^^—, 
be  said  by  the  queen  ...  or  by  any  on  her  behalf." 
Another  bill  swept   away  the  hateful  Treasons  Acts,  Henry's 
which  HeDry  had  introduced  to  guard  his  pretended  Actt^and 
ecclesiastical  supremacy.     All  treasons  were  reduced  to  f^ken  oS''^ 
the  statute  of  25  Edw.  III.  cap.  2,  and  all  prcemunire 
established  since  1  Hen.  VIII.  was  abolished. 

The  same  reactionary  spirit  was  manifested  in  the  convoca- 

«^       -■■  _  tion  re- 

new  Convocation.      Two    resolutions,    drawn    up    by  actionary. 

Weston   the   prolocutor,  were   laid  before  the   Lower 

House  :  the  one  asserted  the  presence  of  Christ's  natural 

body  in  the  Eucharist ;  the  other  repudiated  the  volume 

containing  the  Catechism  and  Forty-two  Articles.  Only 

five  dissentient  voices  were  raised.     The  five  demanded 

the  popular  panacea  for  difference  in  religious  ojoinions 

— a  public  disputation.     A  four  days'  bout  accordingly  The  public 

took  place  in  the  presence  of  many  of  the  nobility.    The  tion. 

dogma  of  transubstantiation  was,  as  usual,  the  point 

assailed  by  the  Reforming  champions.^    The  controversy 

was  without  practical  results. 

The  queen  had  from  the  first  determined  to  accept  The  pro- 
Philip   of    Spain   as   her   husband.      Gardiner   vainly  marriag-e 
remonstrated,  urging  the  offence  this  alliance  would  withPhmp- 
give  to  France,  the  personal  unpopularity  of  the  prince, 
and  Englishmen's  ineradicable  antipathy  to  Spain.  The 
forecast  of  the  chancellor  was  justified  by  Wyat's  in- 
surrection in  February,  1554.     The  Protestant  fanatics  Protestant 
made  use  of  the  occasion,  and  the  rebellion  was  defended  tions?^^^" 
in  pamphlets  of  the  old  Lollard  tone,  denouncing  popery 
as  worse  than  heathenism,  proving  from  Scripture  the 
propriety  of  exterminating  tyrants,  and  even  arguing 

'  A  resume  of  the  arguments  may  be  found  in  Collier's  Ecclesiastical  History, 
vol.  vi.  p.  39,  seq. 


252 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


The  second 
flieM  of 
Protestants 
and 
Keformers. 


More 

royal  ' ' In- 
1  unctions. " 
March, 
1554. 


Six  hishops 
deprived. 


that  all  absolute  authority  was  the  invention  of  the 
devil.  One  of  these  treatises  has  been  attributed  to 
Bishop  Poynet.  Mary,  however,  rightly  regarded  the 
French  Protestants  as  the  main  source  of  such  pro- 
paganda, and  an  order  was  now  issued  that  all  the 
refugees  should  leave  the  kingdom  within  twenty-four 
days.  Again  a  number  of  the  English  Eeformers 
accompanied  the  exiles. 

Mary  appears  to  have  had  the  true  Tudor  propensity 
to  extend  the  regale.  Until  she  formally  transferred 
the  supremacy  to  the  Pope  the  Church  had  scarcely 
more  liberty  of  action  than  under  Henry  and  Edward. 
March,  1554,  produced  a  batch  of  royal  "Injunctions," 
which  the  bishops  were  to  ]3ut  in  force.  It  was  ordered 
that  all  the  ancient  ceremonies,  holy  days,  and  canons 
should  be  restored ;  that  the  bishops  should  do  their 
utmost  to  suppress  heresy  and  stop  the  circulation  of 
scandalous  books  and  ballads ;  that  all  married  priests 
should  be  deprived,  or  else  be  separated  from  their 
wives ;  and  that  those  who  had  broken  a  monastic  vow 
by  marriage  should  be  formally  divorced  and  also 
punished.  Strangely  enough,  considering  their  only 
warrant  was  the  royal  supremacy,  these  "Injunctions" 
relieved  the  clergy  from  the  oath  of  primacy  or  succession, 
and  expunged  from  all  future  episcopal  instruments  or 
processes  the  words  "  regia  auctoritate  fulcitus." 

The  "  Injunctions  "  were  no  hrutum  fulmen.  Ten  days 
after  their  publication,  a  commission  was  issued  to 
Gardiner  and  others  to  deprive  four  prelates  who  had 
broken  a  monastic  vow  in  marrying — Holgate  of  York, 
Eerrar  of  S.  David's,  Bird  of  Chester,  and  Bush  of 
Bristol — and  to  inflict  on  them  such  penance  as  should 
seem  proper.  The  same  commissioners  were  also  de- 
puted to  deal  with   the  persons   who   "  named  them- 


MARY.  253 

selves  "  Bisliops  of  Lincoln,  Gloucester,  and  Hereford,      chap. 
viz.  Taylor,  Hooper,  and  Harley.     These  bisliops  had     .   ^;    . 
been  nominated  by  letters  patent  of  Edward  VI.,  con- 
taining the  proviso  "  quamdiu  se  bene  gesserint."     It 
was  argued   that  they  had  not  acquitted   themselves 
well,  either  in  respect  of  doctrine  or  behaviour,  and 
that  they  might  therefore  be  deprived.     Appointments 
by  conge  d'elire  soon  filled  six  of  the  vacant  sees  with 
prelates    of  a   more   satisfactory  type.      The   married  And  about 
priests  appear  to  have  been  given  a  year  of  grace  to  iiundred     • 
abjure  their  heresy  and  put  away  their  wives.     There  ^iests!^ 
has  been  much  controversy  as  to  the  number  actually 
deprived.      Dr.   Lingard  admits   that  they  may  have 
been  as  many  as  fifteen  hundred,  nearly  a  sixth  part 
of  the  whole  clerical  body.     None  of  the  deprived  were 
compelled  to  separate  from  their  wives  unless  they  had 
before  marriage  taken  the  monastic  vow.     How  many 
of  the   married   clergy  qualified   themselves   for   con- 
tinuance of  tenure  by  divorce  is  not  recorded. 

Complaints  had  been  made  by  the  Reforming  party  cranmer, 
that  their  views  had  not  been  allowed  a  fair  hearing  L.atimer^'^ 
at   the   recent   disputation.      It   was    to    silence    this  ^^°^°^*^* 
charge,  and  possibly,  too,  with  the  baser  purpose  of 
wreaking  vengeance  on  the  leaders  of  King  Edward's 
Reformation,  that  Cranmer,  Ridley,  and  Latimer  were 
moved   to   Oxf)rd   and   compelled   to   announce    their 
religious    opinions    in   public   (April,    1554).      Three 
crucial   propositions   had   been    selected:    (1)    In    the 
Eucharist,   after   consecration,    there   are    present   the 
human  Body  and  Blood  of  Christ;  (2)  No  other  sub- 
stance but  these  remains ;  (3)  The  mass  is  a  propitiatory 
sacrifice   for   living  and  dead.      Convocation  and   the 
two  universities  had  been   authorized  by  the  queen's 
letters  to  form  a  committee  for  conducting  the  con- 


254  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

troversy.  Eiglit  divines  represented  Oxford,  and  six 
the  sister  university.  None  of  them  were  of  episcopal 
rank,  so  that  the  Church  now  witnessed  the  anomaly 
of  a  metropolitan  and  two  bishops  tried  by  a  committee 
of  priests.  The  imprisoned  prelates,  of  course,  im- 
pugned all  the  three  propositions  cited.  They  were 
thereupon  told  that  they  must  defend  their  views  in  a 
public  controversy.  Only  two  days  were  allowed  them 
to  prepare  for  this  ordeal,  and  the  three  prelates  were 
unprovided  with  books.  Latimer,  who  was  never  a 
theologian,  and  was  now  in  extreme  old  age,  declared 
he  was  as  fit  to  dispute  in  public  as  to  be  the  captain 
Thedis-       of  Calais.     The  three   were  to  appear  in  the  schools 

putationin      •        i  i     ,.  -\  r\  -\   n      i. 

tiie  schools.  siDgly,  cach  lor  one  day.  Cranmer  was  summoned  nrst, 
on  April  16.  The  line  taken  by  the  prelates  was 
that  of  the  ancient  Catholic  doctors,  and  the  rational- 
istic view  to  which  one  at  least  of  the  three  had 
inclined  at  the  end  of  Edward's  reign  was  not  even 
mentioned.  Many  modern  Protestants  would  find  the 
taint  of  popery  in  the  princijoles  which  Cranmer 
defended  as  the  teaching  of  the  primitive  Church. 
The  presence  of  Christ,  he  urged,  was  real,  but 
spiritual.  The  dogma  which  insisted  on  the  presence 
of  the  natural  Body  of  the  Saviour  involved  numerous 
paradoxes  and  sophistries.  That  exaltation  of  the 
sacrificial  character  of  the  Eucharist  which  bad 
substituted  for  the  Communion  a  propitiatory  mass 
Cranmer  considered  to  be  derogatory  to  the  sacrifice  on 
Calvary. 
TJnfair  The   prelates   would   doubtless   have    made  a  more 

their  Bucccssful  defeiicc,  had  they  been  given  a  fair  hearing. 

Their  speeches,  it  appears,  were  continually  interrupted 
by  the  clamour  of  their  opponents,  who  did  not  hesi- 
tate to  indulge  in  indecent  language  and  gestures,  and 


MARY.  255 

who  aimed  at  prejudicing  the  mob  of  auditors  against 
the  accused,  rather  than  at  maintaining  a  serious 
defence  of  the  three  propositions.  Weston,  who  presided, 
himself  gave  vent  to  personal  reflections  of  a  most 
unseemly  kind.  The  end  of  this  disputation  at  Oxford 
was  that  the  bishops  were  summoned  to  S.  Mary's 
on  April  20,  where,  having  finally  refused  to  sub- 
scribe the  Articles,  they  were  condemned  to  be  guilty  u^eir  con- 
of  heresy.  They  were  relegated  to  an  imprisonment  <^®°^'ia'tiott 
of  greater  rigour.  Six  other  leading  divines  of  the 
Eeformed  party  were  now  in  prison,  viz.  Hooper, 
Eogers,  Philpot,  Bradford,  Crome,  and  Taylor.  It 
appears  that  the  dominant  party  meditated  securing 
another  easy  triumph  by  summoning  them  to  a 
similar  ordeal  at  Cambridge.  Warned  hy  the  character  Manifesto 
of  the  proceedings  in  the  Oxford  schools,  these  divines  °^°*^®^ 
issued  a  paper  in  which  they  declined  public  disputa- 
tion conducted  under  such  auspices,  and  defined  their 
theological  opinions  in  a  series  of  Articles.  In  this 
manifesto  the  four  first  Councils  are  acknowledged 
as  authoritative.  Justification  is  declared  to  be 
effected  by  faith,  but  faith  is  carefully  distinguished 
from  religious  theory.  The  line  taken  with  regard  to 
the  sacraments  is  not  so  satisfactory.  It  is  declared 
that  they  are  not  sacraments  at  all  when  they  are  used 
for  illegitimate  purposes,  or  in  a  difi'erent  manner  than 
that  appointed  by  the  Saviour.  As  instances  of  such 
misuse,  the  divines  denounce  communion  in  one  kind, 
the  dogma  of  transubstantiation,  the  maintaining  the 
mass  to  be  a  sacrifice  for  quick  and  dead.  Using  the 
illiberal  language  by  which  the  men  of  this  school  so 
frequently  discredited  their  cause,  they  attribute  these 
errors  to  "  Antichrist."  To  the  same  source  is  traced 
the  prohibition  of  clerical  marriages. 


imprisoned 
divines. 


256 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


CUAP, 
X. 


Tlie( 


If  divines  in   prison  could  speak  thus  boldly,  it  is 

not  surprising   that   the   adherents    of  the   Eeformed 

! queen's  gystem    in    the    lower   orders   adopted   less    equivocal 

reUgrion  *'  ^  ^  ... 

insulted,  mcthods  of  insulting  the  re-established  faith.  A  girl 
was  employed  to  utter  denunciations  of  Mary  through 
a  wall  near  Aldersgate,  and  her  voice  was  passed  off 
as  that  of  a  spirit.  At  Cheapside,  a  cat  dressed  in 
piiestly  fashion  was  found  hanging  on  a  gallows.  Dr. 
Pendilton,  who  had  complained  of  this  insult,  was  shot 
at  with  a  pistol  near  S.  Paul's.  Prayers  were  put  up 
that  "  God  would  turn  Queen  Mary's  heart  from 
idolatry,  or  else  shorten  her  da3's."  An  impostor  was 
even  suborned  to  represent  Edward  VI.  Such  conduct, 
if  it  did  not  suggest,  to  some  extent  palliates  the  sub- 
sequent adoption  by  Mary  of  a  sanguinary  policy 
towards  the  party  in  opposition. 

In  July,  1554,  the  queen  was  married  to  Philip  at 
Winchester  Cathedral,  by  Bishop  Gardiner.  As  an 
attempt  to  ingratiate  himself  with  his  new  subjects, 
the  king  obtained  concessions  for  the  prisoners  in  the 
Tower.  Archbishop  Holgate  was  released ;  so  were 
Courtenay  and  some  knights  who  had  been  concerned  in 
Wyat's  rebellion  ;  and  the  Princess  Elizabeth  was  sub- 
jected henceforward  to  less  rigorous  restraint.  But 
nothing  could  surmount  the  national  prejudice  against 
Spain,  and  the  marriage  lost  little  of  its  odium. 
More  nego-  General  approval,  however,  was  bestowed  on  the 
^th°B,ome  ^^^cn's  cxcrtions  to  reunite  the  English  Church  with 
that  of  Rome.  The  appointment  of  a  papal  legate 
had  not  been  made  public  till  the  temper  of  the  upper 
classes  had  been  thoroughly  ascertained.  It  was  found 
that  there  was  a  yearning  for  reconciliation  with  the 
Apostolic  see,  qualified  by  a  much  stronger  determina- 
tion not  to  cede  the  Church  lands  confiscated    in  the 


The  royal 
marrlag-e. 


MARY.  257 

two  last  reigns.     These  had,  in  the  first  instance,  been      chap. 
bestowed  on  the  court  favourites,  but  had  since  been     - — H — - 
divided  and  transferred  to  such  an  extent  that  their 
restoration  would  have  damaged  innumerable  interests. 
On  this  point  hinged  the  chief  difficulty  of  reconcilia- 
tion with  Rome.     Bishop  Gardiner  had  been  foremost 
in  repudiating  papal  supremacy  under  Henry  VIII.,  and 
was  by  no  means  as  eager  as  Mary  for  its  re-establish- 
ment.    He  insisted  on  a  guarantee  that  the  question  The 
of  alienated  Church  property  should  not  be  hereafter  conchided. 
opened.     Pope  Julius,  on  the  other  hand,  was  averse  to 
making  this  concession  unconditionally.     It  would  be 
a  shocking  precedent  if  the  rebellions  subjects  of  the 
Holy  See  were  pardoned  on  such  terms.    He  attempted 
to  hoodwink  Gardiner,  by  burdening  the  legate  with 
the  required  pledge,  reserving  his  own  liberty  of  action. 
Pole    meantime   complained    piteously   that    "  Peter " 
had  been  vainly  "knocking  at  the  door  of  Mary"  for 
a  whole  year.     The  wary  chancellor  perhaps  recalled 
how  Peter  had  duped  Henry  YIII.  on  the  occasion  of 
the  divorce  question ;  he  remained  deaf  to  all  expostu- 
lation.    A  bull   was   thus  wrung  from    Pope   Julius, 
giving  Pole  full  power  to  "  give,  relieve,  and  transfer  " 
all  Church  property  to  its  present  holders.     Assured  of 
the  good  will  of  his  countrymen,  and  burning  with  Pole 
zeal  for  their  religious  welfare,  Pole  tarried  not  for  the  England. 
repeal  of  his  attainder,  but  boldly  set  sail  for  England.  ^54.^°' 

If  the  proceedings  which  now  took  place  be  con-  Theyerdict 
sidered  disgraceful,  the  disgrace  must  be  attached  not  o^^^s'iand. 
to  one  estate  or  order  of  men,  but  to  the  enfranchised 
classes  in  the  aggregate.  Six  weeks  before  Pole  landed, 
writs  had  been  issued  for  an  election  to  Parliament. 
It  was  known  that  the  national  representatives  would 
be  asked  to  re-establish  papal  supremacy.     There  was 

s 


258  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

little  or  no  coercion  on  the  part  of  the  court.  The 
qneen  appears  to  have  contented  herself  with  issuing 
circulars  with  the  writs,  contradicting  the  false  report 
that  in  the  scheme  for  reunion  "alteration  was  in- 
tended of  any  man's  possessions."  There  is  no  reason 
to  doubt  that  the  returns  indicated  the  prevalent 
opinion  of  the  educated  classes.  The  verdict  was  all  but 
unanimous.  When  on  November  29  the  new  Commons 
was  asked  whether  the  country  should  accept  papal 
absolution  on  condition  of  abrogating  Henry's  statutes 
of  emancipation,  there  were  two  dissentients  in  a  House 
of  three  hundred  and  sixty.  The  test  is  the  more 
remarkable  if  we  accept  the  stories  of  Mary's  personal 
unpopularity.  Without  intimidation  and  without  cajo- 
lery, England  gave  her  voice  in  favour  of  Eomanism. 
Bather  than  sink  in  the  quagmire  of  inorganic  Protes- 
tantism, she  would  clasp  the  treacherous  hand  of  a 
papal  legate.  The  proceeding  was  perhaps  disgraceful, 
The  ultra-  Certainly  disastrous,  to  the  nation.  But  we  can  con- 
accouSt^''*^  demn  none  but  those  religious  teachers  who  had  made 
able  lor  the  ^^  causc  of  Ecformatiou  odious. 

It  is  affecting  to  read  the  account  of  the  outlawed 

ciifation^    cardiual's  return,  and  the  most  prejudiced  can  realize 

the  joy  which  for  a  while  irradiated  the  gloomy  path 

of  Mary  Tudor,  as   she   reaped  the   firstfruits  of  her 

labours.     The  Lords  and  Commons  first  met  the  legate 

informally   in    the    great    chamber   at   Whitehall   on 

Pole's         November  28.     Pole,  in  his  address,  thanked  them  for 

speech.        ^^   recent  repeal   of  his  attainder  (which   had  been 

carried  in  the  Houses  on  the  23rd),  and  declared  his 

desire  to  requite  the  favour  in  kind   by  restoring  to 

England  her  patent  of  religious  nobility.     Eemarking 

how  early  this  island  had  received  the  Christian  faith, 

and  how  cordial  in  former  times  had  been  its  relations 


MARY.  259 

with  the  Apostolic  see,  he  came  to  the  topic  of  the  recent 
"  English  revolt."  Of  this  he  said,  with  sufficient  show 
of  justice,  that  "  avarice  and  sensuality  were  its  prin- 
cipal motives,  and  that  it  was  first  started  and  carried 
out  by  the  unbridled  appetites  and  licentiousness  of  a 
single  person."  That  Mary  had  outlived  the  machina- 
tions and  devices  of  her  foes,  and  now  reigned  united 
to  a  Romanist  prince,  he  attributed  to  the  singular 
Providence  of  God.  As  the  Almighty  had  conferred 
on  Philip  and  Mary  the  supreme  imperial  power,  so 
had  He  conferred  on  the  Apostolic  see  the  "  power  of 
keys  and  orders  in  the  ecclesiastical  state."  These  keys, 
however,  the  legate  could  not  as  yet  use,  "  not  for  want 
of  power  in  me  to  give,  but  for  certain  impediments 
in  you  to  receive,  which  must  be  taken  away  before 
my  commission  can  take  effect.  .  .  .  The  mean  whereby 
you  shall  receive  this  benefit  is  to  revoke  and  repeal 
those  laws  and  statutes  which  be  impediments,  blocks, 
and  bars  to  the  execution  of  my  commission."  Thus 
candidly  did  the  legate  lay  before  England  the  price 
of  her  absolution.  There  was  no  misunderstanding  the 
terms  of  the  contract,  and  no  hesitation  in  accepting 
them.  Gardiner  spoke  the  feeling  of  the  Houses  when 
he  exclaimed,  as  Pole  withdrew,  "A  prophet  has  the 
Lord  raised  up  among  us  from  among  our  brethren,  and 
he  shall  save  us."  The  repeal  of  the  obnoxious  Acts 
would,  however,  take  some  time,  and  both  sides  de- 
precated further  delay.  The  Houses  promised  to  submiss.oa 
repeal  the  Acts  hereafter ;  the  legate  consented  to  Houses, 
honour  the  pledge  by  granting  immediate  absolution. 
In  the  House  of  Lords  this  arrangement  was  accepted 
nem.  con. ;  in  the  Commons,  Sir  Ealph  Bagenall  pro- 
tested that  he  "  had  sworn  to  King  Henry's  laws,  and 
he  would  keep  his  oath."   He  and  one  other  member 


26o  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

CHAP,  gave  an  adverse  vote.  A  joint  petition  was  drawn 
__^|:_^  np  by  the  Houses,  declaring  their  penitence,  and  im- 
ploring absolution.  The  climax  was  reached  on  S. 
Andrew's  Day,  1554,  when,  after  attending  high  mass 
at  Westminster  Abbey,  the  two  Houses  assembled 
at  AVhitehall  to  give  final  effect  to  the  concordat. 
Their  Gardiner,    as   the   chancellor,    presented   the   petition, 

apoiog-y.  -wherein  the  Lords  and  Commons  declare  themselves 
"  very  sorry  and  repentant  for  the  schism  and  dis- 
obedience committed  .  .  .  against  the  said  see  Apos- 
tolic, either  by  making,  agreeing  to,  or  executing  any 
laws,  ordinances,  or  commandments  against  the  su- 
premacy of  the  said  see,  or  otherwise  doing  or  speaking 
what  might  impugn  the  same."  The  petitioners  promise 
"  to  do  that  which  shall  be  in  us  for  the  abrogation 
and  repealing  of  the  said  laws  and  ordinances  in  this 
present  Parliament."  A  "  most  humble  suit "  is  pre- 
sented "  that  we  may  obtain  from  the  see  Apostolic, 
by  the  said  most  reverend  Father,  as  well  particularly 
as  universally,  absolution,  release,  and  discharge  from  all 
such  censures  as  by  the  laws  of  the  Church  we  be  fallen 
in;  and  that  we  may,  as  penitent  children,  be  received 
into  the  bosom  and  unity  of  Christ's  Church ;  so  as 
this  noble  realm,  with  all  the  members  thereof,  may  in 
unity  and  perfect  obedience  to  the  see  Apostolic  and 
Pope  for  the  time  being,  serve  God  and  your  Majesties 
to  the  furtherance  and  advancement  of  His  honour  and 
glory."  Pole,  in  a  few  dignified  expressions,  congratu- 
lated the  English  nation  on  its  repentance.  He  then 
The  nation  ro.'-e ;  the  wliolc  assembly  knelt.  The  dead  silence  was 
Kov.  30,  broken  by  a  few  solemn  words  of  absolution,  con- 
cluding, "  We  do  absolve  and  deliver  j^ou  and  every 
of  you,  with  this  whole  realm  and  the  dominions 
thereof,  from  all  heresy  and  schism,  and  from  all  and 


MARY.  261 

every  judgment,  censure,  and  pain  for  that  cause  in-  chap, 
curred  ;  and  we  do  restore  you  again  into  the  unit}''  ^X— 
of  our  mother  the  Holy  Church,  in  the  name  of  the 
Father,  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost."  Te  Deiims, 
masses,  processions,  and  days  of  jubilee  throughout 
the  whole  Roman  dominion  celebrated  the  relapse  of 
England  to  "  popery." 

The  clergy  had  petitioned  for  a  special  absolution  The  cierg-y 
of    their   order.      Convocation    accordingly    appeared  absolved, 
before   Pole    at    Lambeth    on  December    6,    and    the 
English   clerical   estate    was    formally   purged   of    its 
guilt..    For  the  reinstatement  of  their  ancient  tyrant 
the  clergy  of  England  had  shown  little  anxiety.     They 
consoled  themselves,  however,  with  the  hope  that  with 
the  restoration  of  Roman  supremacy  there  would  come 
compensation  for  the  recent  spoliations.     The   Lower  They  pieai 
House  of  Convocation  expressed  these  aspirations  in  an  tion  0?°^^' 
address  to  the  bishops.     It  praj^ed  that  the  tithes  and  p^^pgi^^y 
oblations   lately   alienated   might   be   restored   to  the 
Church ;  that  the  modern  anomaly  of  lay  impropriations 
might  be  abolished;  that  the  chantry  revenues  might 
be  spent,  as  promised,  in  the  establishment  of  schools 
and  hospitals  ;  that  the  Church,  with  res^^ect  to  liberty'', 
might   be   restored   to  the  benefit   of  IMagna  Charta ; 
that   the  burden  of  tenths,    firstfruits,   and  subsidies 
might   be   removed ;    that  the    "  Praemunire "    statute 
(that  fearful  engine  of  tyranny)  miglit  at  least  be  so 
explained  by  the  judges  that  men  should  henceforth 
know  what  would  be  construed  as  an  offence ;  that  the 
"  Statute  of  the  Submission  of  the  Clergy,"  and  all 
others  that  limited  the  liberties  of  Convocation,  might 
be  repealed. 

It  was  a  vain  entreaty.     That  it  was  the  duty  of  But  this  is 
the  chief  pastor  of  the  Church  to  insist  on  a  redress  of  bond^  ^^^ 


262  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

PHAP.  siicli  grievances  before  absolving  tlie  country  is  obvious 
^-  enough.  But  when  liad  Rome  sacrificed  lier  own  ambi- 
tion to  secure  the  national  clergy  their  liberties  ?  The 
recent  concordat  with  respect  to  the  Church  property 
had  been  all  of  a  piece  with  the  jobberies  under  King 
John  or  Henry  III.,  only  now  it  was  the  oppression  of 
an  oligarchy,  not  a  single  tyrant,  that  obtained  papal 
palliation.  The  Houses,  of  course,  quoted  the  bull  as 
confirming  the  lay  impropriators  in  their  tenure.  The 
legate  had  blessed  and  he  could  not  reverse  it.  No- 
thing could  be  done  by  the  well-wishers  of  the  Church, 
beyond  inserting  an  appeal  to  conscience  in  the  Act 
of  Parliament  which  secured  confiscated  Church  pro- 
perty to  its  present  owners.  The  lay  impropria- 
tors were  herein  implored,  as  they  valued  their  own 
salvation,  to  make  proper  spiritual  provision  for  the 
parishioners  whose  tithes  they  pocketed.  Those  who 
have  in  ^^o^session  Church  plate  and  ornaments  are 
reminded  of  the  fate  of  King  Belshazzar.    Such  was  the 

The  Act.  apostrophe  of  the  helpless  legate  in  the  memorable  Act  ^ 
which  riveted  afresh  the  papal  fetters.  The  preamble 
of  this  Act  described  the  English  Reformation  as  a 
declining  from  the  unity  of  Christ's  Church,  attribu- 
table to  the  "  false  and  erroneous  doctrine  .  .  .  taught, 
preached,  and  written,  partly  by  divers  natural-born 
subjects  of  this  realm,  and  partly  .  .  .  brought  in 
hither  from  sundry  foreign  countries."  The  Act  pro- 
ceeds to  repeal  sixteen  Acts  and  statutes  which  "  had 
been  made  in  Parliament  since  the  twentieth  year  of 
Henry  YIIL,  against  the  supremacy  of  the  see  Apos- 

Extends      tolic."     As  a  sop  to  the  injured  clerical  estate  the  Act 

clerical  ....  '  .         .  .  . 

liberties,  restorcs  tbe  jurisdiction  of  all  ecclesiastical  ordinaries, 
and  susjiends  the  "  Statute  of  Mortmain  "  for  twenty 

1  1  and  2  rbilip  and  Mary,  c.  viii. 


MAJ^V.  263 

years.  To  obtain  these  concessions  Convocation  had 
formally  waived  its  claim  to  the  confiscated  Church 
property,  and  this  disclaimer  is  stated  in  the  Act.  But  justi- 

_^  .  .  fleslayim- 

role  s  dispensation  had  extended  to   other   mnova-  propria- 
tions  besides  lay  tennre  of  Church  property.     He  had  poie's 
ceded  (1)  that  all  bishoprics,  cathedral  churches,  hos-  cessfons^" 
pitals,  colleges,  schools,  etc.,  legally  established  since 
the  schism,  should  be  continued ;    (2)   that  marriages 
recently  concluded,  within  the  Roman  degrees  of  con- 
sanguinity, affinity,  and  spiritual  relation,  should  be 
confirmed  and  the  issue  declared  legitimate ;  (3)  that 
all  institutions  to  benefices,  and  other  promotions  eccle- 
siastical,   and  all  judicial  processes  made  before   ordi- 
naries of  the  realm,  should  be  ratified  and  confirmed.^ 
These   concessions  were   embodied   in  the  Act.      One 
more  proviso  remains  to  be  noticed.    The  Lower  House 
of  Convocation  had  asked  the  bishops  what  was  to  be 
done  with  those  who  had  preached  heretical  and  sedi- 
tious doctrines.     The  bishops  had  taken  counsel  in  the 
matter,   and   were   urged,    it   appears,^  by  the  queen  The  laws 
herself  to  revive  the  old  penal  laws  against  heretics,  tion  of 
Parliament  accordingly  re-enacted  the  statutes  which  revived. 
had  been  j)assed  for    the  suppression  of  the  Lollards 
under  Richard  II.,  Henry  IV.,  and  Henry  V.     It  did 
so  without   pressure,  almost  with  unanimity.     Little, 
however,  could  it  have  been  anticipated  by  the  bishops 
or  the  Parliament  what  an  outbreak  of  cruelty  was  to 
result  from  this  proceeding. 

'  It  is  deserving  of  notice  (in  view  of  the  allegations  of  modern  Romanists) 
that  the  validity  of  the  Anglican  Orders  conferred  during  the  "schism"  was  not 
questioned  by  Pole.  The  bishops  and  priests  who  had  been  appointed  with  the 
ordinal  of  Edward  VI.  were  recognized  as  Catholic  bishops  and  priests.  It  was 
required  that  they  should  be  reconciled  to  Rome,  but  not  that  they  should  be 
reordained.  The  Act  of  Restoration,  by  which  Bishop  Scory  was  enabled  to 
continue  in  office,  may  be  seen  in  Bonner's  register.  The  denial  of  Ridley's 
episcopal  status  in  1555  was  merely  a  wanton  insult. 

^  See  Von  Ranke,  History  of  England,  i.  209. 


264  ECCLESIA  ANGLICANA. 

The  re-establishment  of  Eomanism  had  hitherto  been 
attended  by  few  of  those  severities  which,  in  the  six- 
Hithertono  teenth  century,  were  regarded  as  the  proT)er  means  of 
burnt.  checking  heterodoxy.     The  extreme  penalty  had  been 

inflicted   on   none  since  Joan  Bocher  and  Von  Paris 
suffered  at  the  hands  of  the  Edwardian  Reformers.    The 
revival  of  the  ancient  statutes  at  the  close  of  1554  in- 
augurated a  policy  of  a  very  different  kind,  one  which 
surpassed  in  heinousness  anything  that  Romanism  had 
yet  sanctioiied  in  this  country.    The  cruelties  of  the  In- 
quisition were  now  to  be  transplanted  from  Spain  into 
England,  and  a  reign  of  religious  cruelty  succeeded, 
rearing,   in   the  words  of  a  Romanist  writer,  such,  a 
*'  monument  of  infamy  as  even  at  the  distance  of  three 
centuries  cannot  be  regarded  without  horror." 
The  Marian      '^^^  poHoy  whicb  prevailed  during  the  four  years 
SJiJtem-°^  1555-58    appears    now    almost    as    unintelligible     as 
eibie.  atrocious.     Nothing  was  to  be  gained  by  it.     The  re- 

establishment  of  the  Pope  was  almost  unopposed,  and 
bad  it  been  otherwise  the  fires  of  Smithfield  would  be 
unlikely  to  kindle  a  spirit  of  Roman  Catholic  fervour. 
Its  folly  is  testified  by  the  result.  It  has  given  the 
honour  of  martyrdom  to  men  who  were  many  of  them 
mere  turbulent  anarchists ;  it  made  a  reign,  in  many 
respects  excellent,  more  infamous  to  posterity  than  any 
in  our  history ;  and  it  established  in  our  middle  classes 
a  deep-rooted  hatred  of  "  Popery,"  which  is  hardly  yet 
extinct.  The  complete  collapse  of  the  Old  Learning- 
party,  which  in  the  next  reign  assumes  the  proportions 
and  attitude  of  an  impotent  sect,  was  doubtless  mainl}' 
It  caused  due  to  the  Marian  policy  of  persecution.  It  may  be 
Eliza-  granted  that  this  reaction  was  unreasonable,  since  the 

bethan        extirpation  of  reli odious  error  by  T)hysical  force  was  not 

reaction.  ■•■  o  J    n     J 

a  distinctive  Romanist  principle,  but  was  preached  and 


MARY.  265 

practised  by  the  Protestant  leaders  whenever  circum-  chap. 
stances  permitted,  Calvin's  claim  to  the  title  "  bloody  "  ^ 
being,  indeed,  not  far  inferior  to  that  of  Mary.  If, 
however,  the  process  of  reasoning  was  wrong,  the 
course  of  action  it  induced  deserves  our  approval. 
The  revulsion  gave  the  sway  to  that  sober  party  of 
Eeformers  whose  guiding  principles  had  been  for- 
saken since  the  death  of  Henry.  The  minds  that 
had  been  upset  by  the  violent  changes  of  the  two  pre- 
ceding reigns  gratefully  welcomed  rest  in  that  quiet 
haven  of  Anglo-Catholicism  to  which  the  Elizabethan 
Eeformers  piloted  them. 

There  is  little  doubt  that  these  insane  cruelties  were  Tiie  biame 
suggested  to  the  queen  by  the  newly  imported  Spanish  the  Spanish 
ecclesiastics.     The  fact  that  there  was  no  persecution  tics,^^^^^ 
till  Mary's  marriage  would  itself  suggest  this  view.    The 
antecedents  of  the  divines  who  then  came  into  Enofland 
for  tho  express  purpose,  according  to  their  biographers, 
of  purging  it  from  heresy,  go  far  to  confirm  it.     The 
tradition  that  Gardiner  and  the  English  bishops  intro- 
duced  this  strange   un-English   policy  originated  ap- 
parently in  the  imagination  of  Foxe  the  martyrologist. 
It  was  developed  by  Burnet  and  historians  of  like  mind, 
and  at  last  appears  in  Hume,  worked  up  into  a  fictitious 
argument  between  Gardiner  and  Pole  as  to  the  propriety 
of  persecution.     Gardiner  is  made  to  advise  burning — 
Gardiner,  who  insisted  on  retiring  from  the  commission 
of  inquisitors,   disgusted  with  the  barbarities  he  had 
witnessed.      Cardinal  Pole,  who  did  at  last  abet   the 
persecution,   despite  Lis  natural  mildness,  because  im- 
pugned at  Eome  as  a  fautor  of  heresies,  is  represented 
as  dissuading  Gardiner.     As  a  matter  of  fact,  only  two  Not  with 
English  bishops,  besides  Pole,  can  be  branded  with  the  b^siSpf!'^" 
disgrace  of  willingly  abetting  the  policy  of  the  court. 


266  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

CHAP.  Their  names  are  Bonner,  Bishop  of  London,  a  man 
_i!_  notorious  for  coarse  tastes  and  brutal  temper;  and 
Thornton,  Bishop-suffragan  of  Dover,  who  owed  his  rise 
to  Cromwell,  and  was  one  of  the  visitors  employed 
to  defame  and  despoil  the  monasteries.  To  withstand 
the  Marian  commissioners  must  have  been  perilous,  yet 
six  of  the  bishops  appear  to  have  kept  the  inquisitors 
out  of  their  dioceses. 
Account  of  The  Spanish  ecclesiastics  were  men  who  were 
\itl\.xtl^  ^'  familiarized  with  the  carnage  of  heretics,  on  an  ex- 
tensive scale.  One  of  them,  Alphonso  de  Castro, 
Philip's  chaplain,  had  written,^  in  1547,  a  defence  of 
the  severities  of  the  Inquisition,  entitled  "  De  justa 
Hsereticorum  punitione."  The  mission  of  another, 
Bartholomew  Carranza,  now  Mary's  chaplain,  and  the 
most  active  instrument  of  the  new  policy,  is  thus 
described  by  his  Spanish  biographer :  "  As  it  was  the 
intention  of  the  affianced  parties  to  reduce  the  king- 
dom of  England  to  the  unity  and  bosom  of  the  Catholic 
Church,  the  enterprise  was  begun  by  Carranza  receiving 
orders  to  pass  over  into  England,  and  to  take  with  him 
great  learned  clerks,  volio  might  arrange  the  business 
dexterously.^^  ^  Among  these  clerks  were  Pedro  de  Soto 
and  Juan  de  Yillagarcia.  The  former  was  made 
Regius  Professor  of  Theology  at  Oxford ;  the  latter 
gave  lectures  at  Lincoln  and  Magdalen  Colleges.  Their 
business  in  England,  according  to  their  biographer, 
was  to  "  purify  the  universities  ...  of  the  tares  which 
the  heretic  doctors  had  sown  in  them,"  ^  i.e.  to  coun- 

*  And  reissued  it  in  1556  and  1558,  a  fact  which  sufficiently  impugns  the 
sincerity  of  De  Castro's  sermon  deprecating  persecution  in  1555. 

^  See  three  interesting  essays  in  the  British  Magazine  for  1839,  1840,  on 
*'  Spanish  Accounts  of  the  Marian  Persecution,"  •where  the  view  taken  above 
is  substantiated  at  length. 

^  Fernandez,  Hist.  EccL,  III.  xxx.  433,  quoted  in  the  essay,  British  Magazine, 
May,  1840. 


MARY.  267 

teract  the  recent  teaching  of  Peter  Martyr  and  the 
foreign  Protestants.  Among  Spanish  bigots  there  was 
but  one  way  of  effecting  such  purgation.  The  influence 
of  these  spiritual  advisers  on  a  queen  who  yearned  for 
celebrity  as  a  loyal  daughter  of  the  Church  appears 
to  account  sufficiently  for  this  dismal  episode  in  our 
ecclesiastical  history.  It  is,  however,  quite  credible  pmiip's 
that  Philip,  who  was  continually  presiding  at  holocausts  ^auer^ 
of  heretics  in  Spain,  and  who  knew  how  bitterly  the 
Eeformers  resented  his  sharing  the  English  crown,  him- 
self instigated  this  policy.  He  thought  fit,  however, 
to  work  behind  the  scenes.  De  Castro,  his  chaplain, 
astonished  England  on  one  occasion  by  denouncing  the 
persecutions  from  the  pulpit.  That  this  was  intended 
as  a  blind  can  hardly  be  doubted  when  we  recollect  the 
avowed  principles  of  the  preacher. 

It  must  be  remembered  that  there  was  also  a  strong  The 
party  of  lay  statesmen  panting  for  the  destruction  of  gentry^  ^^^ 
the  Eeformers.  In  the  Commons  the  hatred  of  the 
heretics  had  reached  such  a  pitch,  that  we  find  Gardiner 
protesting  against  it.  The  most  active  instigator  of 
persecution,  next  to  the  Spanish  inquisitors,  was  the 
Marquis  of  Winchester,  lord  keeper  in  1555.  The 
turbulence  and  anarchy  which  were  found  to  go  hand 
in  hand  with  anti-Roman  teaching  doubtless  roused 
this  savage  feeling  in  the  hearts  of  men  who,  if  they 
cared  not  for  religion,  cared  for  their  rights  of 
property.^ 

The  imprisoned  Reformers  had  demanded  that  they 
might  be  brought  to  trial  without  delay,  declaring  that 

'  Dean  Hook  well  remarks :  "  The  most  liberal  journals  of  the  present  day, 
conducted  very  often  by  men  who  never  themselves  cross  the  threshold  of  a 
church,  could  not  be  more  violent  in  their  reprobation  of  the  bishops  for  not 
putting  down  Ritualism,  than  were  the  leading  statesmen  in  Mary's  reign,  when 
TRith  equal  vehemence  they  were  infuriated  against  Protestantism." 


263 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


ciiAr 

X. 


The  first 
commis- 
sion. 
Jan.  1555. 


Irritation 
of  the 
populace. 


for  the  clianges  of  Edward's  reign  they  could  adduce 
authority  from  Scripture  and  the  primitive  Church. 
Their  petition  furnished  Mary's  advisers  w^ith  a  definite 
plan  of  action.  On  January  29  a  commission  Tvas 
issued  by  Pole  to  Bishops  Gardiner,  Tonstal,  Capon, 
and  Aldiidge  to  try  persons  suspected  of  heresy.  The 
first  to  be  examined  were  Hooper,  the  Puritan  Bishop 
of  Gloucester,  and  John  Rogers,  Prebendary  of  S.  Paul's, 
editor  of  the  work  entitled  "  Matthew's  Bible."  In 
this  and  most  succeeding  trials,  the  doctrine  of  the 
transubstantiation  of  the  Eucharist  was  made  the  touch- 
stone. Both  refused  the  materialistic  dogma.  They 
were  thereupon  condemned  as  heretics,  degraded  from 
the  priesthood,  and  committed  to  the  sheriff  for  execu- 
tion. Rogers  was  burnt  at  Smithfield,  Hooper  at 
Gloucester.  Dr.  Rowland  Taylor,  parson  ofHadleigh, 
in  Suffolk,  received  the  same  sentence,  and  was  burnt 
in  his  own  parish.  Saunders,  a  London  clergyman,  had 
meanwhile  been  burnt  at  Coventry.  The  dauntless 
Ferrar,  of  S.  David's,  suifered  at  Carmartheii  on 
March  30. 

For  upsetting  the  recent  religious  settlement  and 
again  alienating  the  English  nation  from  Rome,  no 
more  efficient  policy  could  have  been  devised.  It 
appears  that  the  people  were  so  moved  that  the  com- 
missioners did  not  dare  go  on  with  their  work  for  some 
weeks.  The  Council  had  to  write  a  circular  letter 
to  the  bishops  complaining  that  heretics  were  not  pro- 
ceeded against  (May  2-4).  Gardiner  had  already  ceded 
his  place  on  the  commission  to  a  man  of  very  different 
temperament,  Bonner  of  London.  The  savage  nature 
of  Bonner  was  incapable  of  compunction.  He  carried 
out  the  queen's  policy,  not  merely  ruthlessly,  but  with 


MARY.  269 

needless  brutality,    and   his   diocese  appears   to   have      chap. 
supplied  nearly  half  the  victims  of  the  reign.^  ^- 

To  depict  the  barbarities  inflicted  in  this  period  of  The  three 
j)ersecution  would  be  a  painful  task.  We  shall  content  Oxford, 
ourselves  with  describing  the  memorable  deaths  of  the 
three  great  Eeforming  prelates  at  Oxford.  A  year  and 
a  half  had  elapsed  since  Cranmer,  Eidley,  and  Latimer 
had  been  condemned  in  the  schools.  The  authority 
of  the  commission  which  had  sat  on  them  was  probably 
considered  questionable.  At  any  rate,  in  the  autumn 
of  1555  their  cases  were  made  the  subject  of  fresh 
investigations.  Cranmer's  case  was  different  from  that 
of  Eidley  and  Latimer,  inasmuch  as  he  w^as  a  metro- 
politan, and  could  only  be  sentenced  by  the  Pope. 
September  7  witnessed  the  formality  of  serving  on  the 
imprisoned  primate  a  citation  to  appear  at  Eorae  within 
eighty  days.  Brooks,  Bishop  of  Gloucester,  was  at  the 
same  time  named  as  the  Pope's  commissioner  to  con- 
duct an  immediate  trial  at  Oxford.  Before  Brooks 
Cranmer  appeared  on  September  12.  He  denied  the 
jurisdiction  of  a  court  presided  over  by  a  papal  com- 
missioner, and  gave  answer  under  protest.  He  was 
accused  of  having  married  after  taking  Orders,  of 
holding  heretical  views  on  the  Eucharist,  of  having 
rebelled   against   the   Pope,    to    whom   he   had   sworn 

'  The  following  details  show  the  extent  of  the  persecution  and  the  number  of 
the  victims.  In  1555  there  were  seventy-five  executions ;  in  1556,  eighty-tbree  ;  in 
1557,  seventy-seven;  in  1558,  fifty-one.  Of  these  two  hundred  and  eighty-six 
victims,  one  hundred  and  twenty-eight  were  burnt  in  the  diocese  of  London,  fifty- 
five  in  that  of  Canterbury,  and  forty-six  in  that  of  Norwich.  No  more  than 
seven  persons  were  burnt  in  the  diocese  that  ranks  next  in  the  catalogue,  that 
of  Oxford.  And  several  dioceses  less  accessible  to  tlie  Commissioners,  or  i)resided 
over  by  humane  men,  witnessed  no  executions,  viz.  Lincoln  (AVhire  and  Watson), 
Durham  (Tonstal),  Carlisle  (Aldridge  and  Oglethorpe),  Bath  and  Wells  (Donne\ 
Hereford  (Wart on),  Worcester  (Pate;.  Two  hundred  and  forty  of  the  sufi"erers 
were  males.  Besides  those  burnt,  about  si.Ntj'-eight  persons  are  computed  to  have 
died  in  prison. 


270  ECCLESIA    ANGLICANA. 

allegiance,  and  of  having  advised  the  king  to  adopt 
the  title  "Supreme  Head  of  the  Church."  With 
respect  to  the  last  charge,  Cranmer's  defence  was  that 
the  title  only  meant  that  the  king  was  head  over  all 
his  subjects,  whether  lay  or  clerical.  He  was  sent 
back  to  Bocardo  prison  to  await  the  papal  sentence. 
Ridley  and  Meantime,  Eidley  and  Latimer  were  brought  up 
bvirnT^^  before  the  same  kind  of  commission  as  had  condemned 
Oct.  1555.  Bishops  Hooper  and  Ferrar.  The  commissioners  were 
Bishops  White  of  Lincoln,  Brooks  of  Gloucester,  and 
Holyman  of  Bristol,  or  any  two  of  them.  The  accused 
were  charged  v/ith  the  statements  they  had  made  at 
the  former  disputation.  They  refused  to  alter  these 
statements,  and  were  sentenced  in  S.  Mary's  Church 
to  be  degraded,  excommunicated,  and  given  over  to 
the  civil  power.  It  is  noticeable  that  they  were  only 
degraded  from  priest's  orders.  Latimer,  it  was  pre- 
tended, ceased  to  be  a  bishop  when  he  resigned  his  see 
in  the  reign  of  Henry  VIII.  Eidley's  episcopal  status 
was  impugned  because  he  had  not  been  consecrated 
with  the  old  formulary.  The  execution  took  place  on 
October  6.  Its  scene  was  at  a  part  of  the  city  ditch 
nearly  opposite  Balliol.  The  tragic  end  of  the  sufferers 
at  Oxford  has  raised  them  to  the  position  of  confessors 
of  the  English  Church,  and  their  claim  to  this  honour- 
able distinction  is  unassailable.  If  in  criticising  their 
actions  we  shall  find  much  with  which  we  cannot 
sympathize,  we  must  remember  that  they  were  men 
who  were  gradually  groping  their  way  out  of  mediaeval 
error,  and  who  may  be  excused  if  they  were  some- 
times driven  by  dread  of  the  abuses  of  their  time  into 
extremes  even  more  perilous.  The  same  remark 
applies  to  Hooper,  and  the  many  other  conscientious 
men  who  suffered  at  this  time. 


MARY.   '  271 

Nicholas  Eidley  came  of  an  ancient  Northumbrian 
family.      He   graduated   at  Pembroke,   Cambridge,  in 
1522,    and   became   a   fellow,    and   in   later   days   the  career  of 
master,    of   his   college.     He   imbibed   his   theological  ^^^^®^ 
opinions  during  travels  on  the   Continent,   where  he 
became    acquainted    with    many  of    the   foreign    Re- 
formers.     Becoming    conspicuous     for     his     erudition, 
he  was  appointed  Cranmer's  chaplain  in  1537,  and  a 
royal  chaplain  in  1540.     His  opinions  were  far  more 
pronounced  than  those  of  Cranmer  or  Henry,  and  did 
not  have  much  scope  for  publicity  till  the  accession  of 
Edward.     The  iconoclasm  which  marked  the  first  year 
of  Edward's  reign  was  encouraged  by  the  violent  preach- 
ing of  Ridley.     In  this  year  he  was  made  Bishop  of 
Rochester,  and  when  the  bishops  of  the  Old  Learning 
were  persecuted  he  was  installed  in  Bonner's  see  of 
London   (1550).     He  assisted  Cranmer  in  the  composi- 
tion of  the  Homilies  and  Articles,  and  the  compilation 
of  the  two  Prayer-books,  but  to  what  extent  is  not 
known.     He   appears   to   have   been   a   man   of  great 
learning,  and  it  was  at  his  persuasion  that  Cranmer 
in  this  reign  forsook  his  Lutheran  views  with  regard 
to   the  Eucharist,  and   advocated   that  doctrine  of   a 
spiritual  Presence  which  had  been  maintained  by  John 
Scotus  Erigena.    Ridley  unfortunately  thought  it  neces- 
sary to  illustrate  this  view  by  introducing  a  new  piece 
of  church  furniture.      In  his  dioceses  he  ordered  the 
destruction  of  altars  and  the  setting  up  of  tables  for 
Holy  Communion.      This   innovation   was   afterwards 
sanctioned  by  law,  but  this  does  not  excuse  Ridley's 
arbitrary  conduct,   which  was  the  more  preposterous, 
inasmuch  as  the  First  Prayer-book  was  still  the  only 
lawful  Liturgy.     As  Mr.  Perry  says,  "  This  order  not 
only  produced  the  greatest  confusion  in  the  ritual  of     . 


72 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


CHAP. 
X. 


Care'ir  of 
Latimer. 


the  Church,  as  the  table  was  set  in  every  variety  of 
position,  but  also  was  the  fruitful  parent  of  grievous 
sacrilege  and  profanation."^  When  Tonstal  was  re- 
moved from  Durham,  Northumberland  proposed  to 
appoint  Eidley  to  the  see,  reserving  to  himself  a  great 
part  of  the  e2:)iscopal  emoluments.  It  is  not  clear 
whether  Eidley 's  translation  had  been  actually  effected 
before  the  death  of  Edward.  We  have  remarked  that 
Ridley  was  needlessly  aggressive  in  attempting  to  pro- 
i^elytize  "the  Princess  Mary  during  her  confinement  at 
Hunsdon.  On  Edward's  death  he  preached  with  his 
usual  energy  in  favour  of  Lady  Jane's  usurpation. 
When  Mary  triumphed  he  was  committed  to  the  Tower 
with  Northumberland's  other  adherents  (July  26,  1553), 
and  never  again  enjoyed  liberty. 

Hugh  Latimer  was  a  man  of  mark  at  the  time  of 
the  divorce  question,  and  was  a  generation  older  than 
his  fellow-sufferer.  He  was  the  son  of  a  small  farmer. 
He  had  entered  Christ  College,  Cambridge,  and  there 
learnt  the  principles  of  the  New  Learning  from  Thomas 
Bilney,  a  singular  enthusiast  who  was  afterwards 
burnt  at  Norwich.  Latimer's  forte  was  preaching. 
His  vigorous  and  homely  style  was  much  appreciated 
by  Henry,  and  having  thrown  in  his  lot  with  the 
supporters  of  the  divorce,  he  became  Anne  Boleyn's 
chaplain,  and  was  by  her  interest  made  Bishop  of 
Worcester.  His  zealous  denunciations  of  the  abuses 
of  the  time  probably  did  much  good.  Occasionally  his 
zeal  was  not  tempered  by  discretion.  In  March,  1532, 
he  was  summoned  before  Convocation,  and  compelled 
to  admit  that  in  his  preaching  he  had  committed  him- 
self to  errors  of  doctrine.  The  offence  was  repeated 
shortly  afterwards,  and  was  again  disowned.    ProbabJy 

'  Perry,  Student's  English  Church  Histoiy,  p.  206. 


MAI^V.  273 

Ills  zeal  for  reformation  was  without  a  substantial  basis      chap. 
of  fixed  theological  opinion.      Yet,  like  most  of   the     — ^'^^ 
men  of  this  time,  Latimer  saw  no  cruelty  in  punishing 
religious  error  as  a  crime,  and  he  assisted  at  the  burning 
of  Friar  Forrest  for  denying  the    king's  supremacy. 
After  the  "  Act  of  Six  Articles"  his  position  was  in  his 
opinion  untenable.     He  resigned  his  bishopric  (1539), 
and  was  committed   to  the  custody  of  the  Bishop   of 
Chichester    till    the    end  of   the  reign.     On  Edward's 
accession  he  devoted  himself  to  the  work  of  preaching. 
Having  no  preferment,  he  could  denounce  the  iniquities 
of  Edward's  Council  in  a  style  unknown  to  the  courtly 
diocesans,  and  the  vigour  and  humour  of  his  homilies 
made   him   as   hateful  to  the  Government  as  he  was 
popular  with  the  public.     The  ground  of  his  arrest  in 
1553  was  "his  seditious  demeanour."      Latimer  had  no 
pretence  to  theological  attainment,  and  wisely  shunned 
lengthy   exposition    of    his    tenets   before   the    Oxford 
doctors.     He  said  he  had  "  forgotten  his  Latin,"  and 
would  only  give  an   account  of  his  faith  in  English, 
and  then  they  might  "  do  their  pleasure "  with  him. 
In  the  same  bold  style  he  conducted  himself   at  his 
final  trial  in  September,   1555.     The  glorious  end  of 
the  old   man  is   too  well  known  to   be  described   in 
detail. 

Cranmer's  death  did  not  follow  till  March  21,  1556.  cranmer 
In  December  the  Pope's  sentence  had  been  issued,  sfi months! 
condemning  bim  as  having  brought  in  "the  heresy  of 
Berengarius  and  the  false  and  heretical  doctrines  of 
Luther."  Thirleby  of  Ely  and  Bonner  were  the  bishops 
appointed  to  degrade  him  from  the  archiepiscopal  rank. 
This  ceremony  took  place  in  Christ  Church  Cathedral. 
Cranmer  contented  himself  with  making  a  formal 
appeal  from  the  Pope  to  the  next  General  Council.     In. 


274  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

CHAP,     a  plain  layman's  dress  he  was  taken  back  to  prison. 
— ^ —     Tliirleby,  a    friend    of    Cranmer's,    thinking    to    save 
him  from  the  stake,  implored  him  to  make  some  con- 
cession to  his   adversaries  in  the  way  of  recantation. 
He  is  in-      In  an  unhappy  moment  of  weakness  the  prisoner  was 
recant.         induced   to   admit   the   Pope's    authority   in   a   paper 
commonly  termed  his  first  recantation.    The  way  being- 
thug  paved,  other  recantations  were  wrung  from  him 
by    the    Spanish   friars   with    regard    to    the    Pope's 
supremacy,  his   own    writings,  and  his    views  on  the 
Sacrament    of    the    Eucharist.     With    this    last,    his 
fourth  recantation,  came  restoration  to  liberty,  and  the 
unhappy  man  had  no  doubt  his  life  would  be  spared. 
A    few  more   concessions  were   still   required  by   the 
queen's  divines.     He  must  attest  a  paper  denouncing 
the    Protestant   systems.      Cranmer    did    so    without 
reading  it.     More  recantations  were  brought  to  him. 
These  too  he  signed.     Then  he  was  ordered  to  appear 
in    S.   Mary's   on   March  21,  to  make   his  recantation 
public.     It  is  sickening  to  read    that  the    queen    had 
throughout    intended  to  sacrifice   Cranmer.     She    had 
connived  at  the  atrocious  jobbery,  by  which  a  doomed 
man    sold    his    convictions    for  a    false    assurance    of 
pardon.      The  cause   that  Mary  had  for  just  resent- 
ment against  the  Primate  makes  the  religious  pretext 
in  this  case  specially    disgusting.      In  view   of   such 
wickedness,  the  inconsistency  of  Cranmer  appears  in- 
deed a  pardonable  infirmity. 
Kenounces       The  unliapj^y  man  appears  not  to  have    learnt  the 
cantations.  purposc  of  his  adversaries  till  he  was  on  his  way  to 
S.  Mary's  Church.     When  called  upon  by  the  preacher, 
Dr.  Cole,  to  declare  his  repentance,  he    declared  that 
his   recantations   had   been    made    with    the   view   of 
saving  life,  and  announced  his  allegiance  to  the  form 


MARY.  2ys 

of  faith  for  wliicli  lie  had  been  condemned.     The  right 
hand  that  had  signed  those  recantations  should  be  the 
first   member  to  suffer.     A  death  comparatively  easy  And  is 
ended  the  chequered  life  of   the  Eeforming  primate.  March  21, 
His  name  has  been  brought  in  so  often  in  connection  ^^^^^ 
with  the  history  of  the  Eeformation  movement  that 
it  will  be  unnecessary  to  describe  his  career  in  detail. 
The  day   before    Cranmer's   execution,   Cardinal  Pole, 
the  archbishop  elect,  received  priest's  orders  in  Grey 
Friais'  Church.     On  March  21  he  officiated  as  a  priest, 
and  on  the  22nd  he  was  raised  to  tlie  episcopate.     The 
Archbishop  of  York  and    six  bishops  of  the  southern 
province  officiated. 

Eeverting  to  the  proceedings  of  the  previous  year,  Mary 
we  notice  the  most   creditable  transaction   of  Mary's  rr^aiTm^^^ 
reign,  the  restoration  to  the  Church  of  the  tenths,  first-  p^^op^ia- 

....  tions. 

fruits,  impropriations,  manors,  lands,  etc.,  acquired  by 
the  Crown  since  the  twentieth  year  of  Henry  VIII. 
The  revenue  of  these,  calculated  at  £60,000,  was  con- 
signed to  Pole  for  the  improvement  of  the  small  livings. 
Parliament,   the   House   of    Commons   especially,    was 
reluctant  to  sanction  this  act  of  justice,  fearing  it  might 
be  followed  by  an  order  for  the  restitution  of  abbey 
lands  and  other  spoils.    Pole,  however,  gave  satisfactory 
assurances  on  this  point,  and  the  Act  legalizino*  this 
surrender  was  passed  in  October,  1555.    On  the  accession  Elizabeth 
of  Elizabeth  this  commendable  measure  was  rescinded.  tSTct^of 
The  abject  poverty,  ignorance,  and  social  degradation  of  ^^''®''°"*^' 
the  parochial  clergy  in  that  and  the  foUowino-  rei^n 
were  a  necessary  consequence. 

Reginald  Pole  was   consecrated  as  primate  tlie  day  Re-estab- 
after  Cranmer's  death.    The  work  of  restoring-  religious  ^^^^^^"*  °* 
houses  was  now  actively  carried  on,  and  the  records  of  ^^^^^e-ion. 
the  visitations  of  abbeys  in  Henry's  reign,  and  similar 


276  ECCLESIA   ANGLIC  ANA. 

CHAP,      damaging  docnments,  were  carefully  songlit  for  and  de- 
■    ^•.  .     stroyed.     A  house  of  Dominicans  was   establi^shed    at 
Sinithfield,    a   house   of   Carthusians   at  Sheen,  and  a 
nunnery  near  Brentford.     The  Knights  of  S.  John  were 
re-establidied,  and  the  Jesuits  tried  to  obtain  a  footing, 
but  were  unable  to  master  the   antagonism  of  Pole. 
"Westminster,  which  in  Honvy's  reign  had  been  made  a 
collegiate  church,  with  a  dean  and  canons,  was  restored 
to  its  ancient  condition  as  a  Benedictine  abbey.     The 
universities  were  visited,  and  care  was  taken  to  elimi- 
nate therefrom  all  heretical  teaching.    In  imitation,  per- 
haps, of  Henry's  absurd  citation  of  Thomas  Becket,  a 
formal  process  was  instituted  at  Cambridge  against  the 
deceased  Eefurmers,  Bucer  and  Fagiiis.     They  were  con- 
victed of  heresy ;  and  their  bodies  were  disinterred  and 
burnt  with  their  books.     At  Oxford  the  body  of  Peter 
Martyr's  wife,  who  had  broken  a  vow  of  celibacy  in 
marrying,  was  cast  on  a  dunghill. 
Persecution      It  would  have    bccn    well  had  the  books  and  dead 
continues.    ^^^:^^^  ^f  hcrctics  been  the  only  victims.     Throughout 
the  four  years  1555-58    the   Marian   persecution    was 
carried  on  with  ever-increasing  ferocity.    At  the  close  of 
the  reign  it  was  a  settled  thing  that  even  recantation 
should  not  save  the  doomed  heretic.     He  gained  only 
the   concession   of  being   attended   to  the  stake  by  a 
Pole  forced  Eomaiiist   confessor.      Cardinal   Pole   was   induced    to 
p°rse^u-^^  disobey  the  dictates  of  a  naturally  gentle  temperament, 
*'°""  and  abet  this  policy  of  persecution,  in  order  to  recover 

his  reputation  as  an  orthodox  Catholic.  Pole  was  in- 
clined to  favour  some  of  the  Lutheran  opinions ;  he  had 
consequently  been  accused  of  heresy  at  Rome,  and  even 
cited  by  the  Inqui.^ition.  The  Pope  readily  listened  to 
his  detractors,  since  Pole  had  taken  the  side  of  Spain  in 
the  recent  political  complications,  while  the  Apostolic 


MARY.  277 

see  was  abetting  France.     Mary  supported  him  loyalh-,      chap. 
and  when  the  Pope  went  so  far  as  to  i  evoke  his  legatine     — J::_ 
commission,  and  appoint  in  his  stead  Friar  Peto,  her  ThePope-s 
own    confessor,    she   showed  a   spirit   worthy   of  her  Poie  re- 
father.     She  wrote  to  the  Pope,  declaring  that  it  was  ^ary.  " 
her  prerogative  to  have  a  legate  at  Canterbury,  and 
that   neither   she   nor   her   nubility   would  have  this 
ancient   right   impugned.     The   ports   were   closed   to 
Eoman  vessels.      Peto,  wdio  was   abroad,  was  warned 
that    he    would    incur    a  prceinunii-e   if    he    landed   in 
England.     Pole  himself  was  not  permitted  to  obey  the 
insidious  summons  luiing  him  into  the  power  of  his 
enemies   at   Eome.     The    defeat  of  the   French    at  S. 
Quentin  brought  Paul  IV.  to  a  better  mind.     He  ad- 
mitted  that    the   cardinal   had   been   slandered.      The 
appointment  of  Peto  was  not  pres-ed,  and  Pole  retained 
the  title  of  legate,  but  whether  by  virtue  of  his  office 
or  as  legatus  a  latere  is  not  certain. 

The  petition  of  Convocation,  in  January,  1558,  in-  convoca- 
forms  us  what  was  still  deemed  lacking  for  the  com[)lete  iss^'s.'' 
re-establishment  of  the  old  religion.  In  this  petition 
(accompanying  a  subsidy  for  the  disastrous  wars  in 
France)  it  is  desired  that  Homilies,  a  Catechism,  and 
an  English  Primer  may  be  put  forth;  that  churches, 
vestments,  and  altars  may  be  reverently  cared  for  and 
restored  :  that  discipline  may  be  established  ;  that  the 
clergy  who  had  married  in  the  late  reign  shoidd  only 
serve  as  unbeneficed  curates;  that  the  cleiical  dress 
should  be  enforced  ;  and  that  more  care  should  be  ex- 
pended on  the  cathedral  schools  and  on  the  universities. 
Canons  on  these  points  were  drawn  up,  but  not  passed.^ 

Meanwhile  there  rankled  in  the  heart  of  the  nation  Hatred  of 
a  deep-seated  abhorrence  of  the  cruelties  sanctioned  by  ^o^^anism. 

'  Cardwell's  Synodalia,  ii.  448,  449. 


278 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


cirAP. 

X. 


Dea-th  of 
Mary  and 
many 
bisliops. 


Marj.  A  revulsion  from  tlie  religious  sj'stem  with 
which  they  originated  was  inevitable.  Eomanism  had 
been  given  another  fair  trial.  It  had  availed  itself  of 
it  only  to  incur  fresh  odium  by  espousing  a  policy  at 
which  English  humanity  shuddered. 

Henceforth  England  and  Rome  were  to  be  severed. 
Schooled  by  its  experiences  under  Edward  and  Mar}^ 
the  Church  of  England  was  now  able  to  bring  out  of 
its   treasury  things   new  and   old,  to  reform  without 
committing    itself    to   the   anarchical    dreams   of    the 
sectary,    to   maintain  the    faith  without  reviving  the 
superstition  of  the  papist.     Catholicism  was  still  to  be 
the   religion   of    England,    but    not   the    centralizing 
Catholicism  of  Mary  Tudor.     Its  Church  would   call 
itself  Eeformed,  but  not  as  recognizing  the  destructive 
systems  of  a  Calvin  or  a  Knox.     But  one  life  debarred 
the  realization  of  such  an  ideal,  and  that  life  was  now 
fast  ebbing  away,  drained  by  corroding  care,  by  blighted 
affection  and   disappointed  hopes.     On  November   17, 
1558,  Queen  Mary  died,  miserable  and  odious.      Ere 
she  had  been    twenty- two  hours  dead,  Cardinal  Pole, 
her    cousin,    primate,    and    most    efficient    ally,    had 
passed  away.     A  strange  mortality  was  at  this  time 
rife,  and  within  a  few  weeks  no  less  than  nine  other 
sees  were  void  of  their  occupants.     The  way  was  thus 
])repared   for   the   continuance  of  reformation  on   the 
lines  of  Henry  VIII. ;    this  being  the  religious  pro- 
gramme which  now  commended  itself  to  the  majority 
of  thinking  men,  as  well  as  to  the  new  sovereign. 


ELIZABETH.  279 


CHAPTER  XI. 

A.D.  1558-1575. 

Modern   misunderstanding   of  the   religious  status — Few  "  Papists  "—And  few 
"  Protestants  "  in  tlie  modern  sense — The  Anglo-Catholics— Anglicanism  and  the 
Romanists — The  Romanists  leniently  treated — Until  Pius  V.  incited  them  to 
revolt — Anglicanism   and  the   ultra-Protestants — Puritans  humoured — But  all 
Catholic  essentials  are  conserved— Illustrations  of  this  principle— The  queen 
does  not  desire  precipitate  change— Conduct  of  Paul  IV.— Consequent  rupture- 
Turbulence  of  the  "  evangelics  "— The  royal  proclamation — The  coronation — 
]\IatthewParker — Prayer-book  revisionists  appointed— The  new  Parliament — The 
supreme  governorship — The  "Spoliation  Bills"— The  co??r/(?d'tiire — Convocation 
reactionary — The  Elizabethan  Prayer-book— The  queen's  influence  apparent — 
The  Ornaments  rubric— "  Act  of  Uniformity  "—The  queen  and  primate  desire 
a  higher  standard— The  Marian  bishops— The  disputation  at  Westminster — 
Punishment  of  two  bishops — Nonjuring  bishops  deprived — Not  treated  with 
severity — The  Court  of  High  Commission — The  visitation  of  dioceses — The  "In- 
junctions " — The  admonition  about  altars — And  about  wafer  bread — Choice  of 
a  primate — IMatthew  Parker's  consecration — The  "Nag's  Head  Fable" — Other 
episcopal  appointments — The  Low  Church  element— The  new  Lectionary  and 
Calendar— Scarcity  of  clergy— Lay  helpers  appointed— Jewel's  "  Apology  " — The 
"  Bishops'  Bible  "—Revision  of  Cranmer's  Forty-two  Articles— Opposed  by  the 
Puritans  in  Convocation— The  queen  alters  the  Articles— The  disputed  clauses 
accepted  in  1571 — The  Second  Book  of  Homilies  — Nowell's  Catechism  rejected — 
The  Puritan  manifesto  in  Convocation— The  queen's  half-hearted  support  of  the 
Church— Leicester's  influence— Dissenters  take  Orders  in  the  Church — Their 
divergence  in  ritual  gives  Parker  a  vantage-ground — The  queen  evades  the 
responsibility — Parker's  "Advertisements  "—  Not  sanctioned  by  the  queen — The 
"Advertisements"  specify  the  minimum — Excerpts  from  the  "  Advertisements" 
— The  "Advertisements"  illustrated  by  Cecil's  letter — Puritan  protests — Non- 
conforming clergy  cited — Romanist  hostilities — The  Thirty-nine  Articles  made  a 
test  of  loyalty — Cartwright  at  Cambridge — Wentworth's  "  Bills  of  Reformation  " 
— The  "  First  and  Second  Admonition  " — Tests  applied  to  suspected  clergymen — 
Death  of  Matthew  Parker. 

The   Churcli   history   of   this   period   has   often   been 
misunderstood,  because   men  have   regarded  the   con- 


28o 


ECCLESIA    ANGLICANA. 


CHAP. 
XI. 


Modern 

mistxncler- 

standing- 

of  the 

religious 

status. 


Few 

"papists." 


And  few 
"Protes- 
tants " 
in  the 
modera 
sense. 


The  Anglo 
catholics. 


tending  religious  schools  as  separated  by  the  hard  and 
fast  lines  of  a  less  unsettled  time.     The  student  reads 
that  in  1554  a  Protestant  country  became  Eomanist, 
and  as  unanimously  became  Protestant  in  1559.     In- 
terpreting these   phrases  by  the  light  of  the  present 
day,  he  is  puzzled   by  what  seems  an    extraordinary 
instance  of  national   fickleness.     One  chief  source  of 
confusion  lies  in  the  application  of  the  negative  and 
sectarian  term   "  Protestant "  to  a  system  professedly 
dogmatic  and  non-sectarian.    In  its  modern  sense — as  in- 
cluding every  kind  of  i  eligious  system  except  the  Eoman 
— this  designation  would  not  have  been  accepted  by 
any  of  the  Elizabethan  Reformers.     The  term  Eomanist 
has  also  acquired  a  different  force  from  what  it  had  in 
the  sixteenth  centurj^  inasmuch  as  it  may  include  a 
belief  in  doctrines  which  the  mediaeval  Church  did  net 
acknowledge,   or  at  least  did  not;  enunciate.     At  the 
accession  of  Elizabeth,  however,  as  in  the  three  reigns 
preceding,  these  designations  were  not  only  of  different 
force ;    they  were  really  the  badges  of  only  two  small 
sections  of  society.     One  national  Catholic  Church  was 
recognized  by  all.     The  papists  or  Eomanist  s  were  the 
faction,  now  small  and  unpopular,  who  insisted  that  the 
mediaeval  centralizing  system  was  a  Catholic  essential. 
The  "  Precisian,"  on  the  other  hand  (whose  congener 
on  the  Continent  was  called  "  Protestant  "  if  a  Lutheran, 
and  "Eeformed"  if  a  Calvinist),  not  only  regarded  the 
Pope  as  Antichrist,  but  extended  his  hatred  to  various 
Catholic  principles  which  our  Church  has,   of  course, 
alwaj^s    retained.      Between  these  two  poles    lay  the 
large  party  which  we  now  call  Anglican,  or  Anglo- 
Catholic — that  which  desired  reformation  but  not  revo- 
lution.  Its  uneducated  adherents  were  probably  repelled 
from  Eomanism  by  the  Marian  persecution  alone,  as 


ELIZABETH.  281 

they  had  been  from  Protestanism  by  the  misgovernment  chap. 
of  Edward's  reign.  But  it  included  also  numbers  of  v__^-_ 
devout  men  who  had  learnt  that  the  papal  pre- 
tensions were  not  primitive  but  mediaeval,  and  who 
found  in  the  Papacy  a  source  of  many  religious  abuses. 
Unlike  the  Precisian  party,  these  true  Eeformers  saw 
no  religious  merit  in  disowning  or  denouncing  the 
Pope.  Eather,  indeed,  than  tolerate  such  an  outbreak 
of  irreligion  as  had  been  witnessed  under  Edward 
VI.,  they  would  re-establish  his  power  in  England. 
Eomanism,  to  many  of  them,  doubtless  appeared  not  so 
much  a  question  of  personal  religion  as  of  ecclesiastical 
policy.  The  re-establishment  of  Romanism,  however, 
proved  a  failure.  It  failed  because  with  Eomanism 
came  a  system  of  religious  persecution.,  hitherto  un- 
known to  this  country  and  repugnant  to  the  English 
disposition.  Long  before  Mary's  death  it  was  clear  that 
the  Marian  policy  was  unpopular  with  all  but  extreme 
partisans,  and  that  Henry's  expedient  of  a  national 
Church  reforming  itself  without  deference  to  Eome 
must  be  tried  again.  Of  this  popular  feeling  Elizabeth 
was  destined  to  be  the  exponent. 

Elizabeth  professed  "  Anglo-Catholic  "  views.  But 
policy,  selfishness,  and  personal  attachments  often 
prevented  her,  as  they  prevented  her  father,  from 
governing  in  aocordaixje  with  these  principles.  Her 
treatment  of  Church  property  affords  an  instance  of 
this  inconsistency.  Eortunately  it  in  no  way  affected 
the  Church's  more  valuable  heritage  of  Catholic  doc- 
trine. On  this  point  the  despoiling  sovereign  was 
more  conservative  than  most  of  her  prelates. 

The  Romanizing  faction,  represented  by  the  Marian  Ang-iican- 
bishops,  argued  that  the  Church  "  had  been   planted  R^^nists^ 
within  this  realm  by  the  motherly  care  of  the  Church 


282 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


CUAl', 
XI. 


The 

Romanists 
leniently 
treated. 


Until  Pius 
V.  incited 
tiiem  to 
revolt. 


Anglican- 


of  Eome."  The  queen  herself  retorted  on  them  with 
the  undeniable  fact  that  "  when  Austin  came  from 
Rome,  this  her  realm  had  bishops  and  2:)riests  therein." 
So  far  from  admitting  that  the  centralizing  ecclesiastical 
system  was  a  Catholic  essential,  she  asserted  that  her 
realm  had  been  in  past  times  usurped  by  a  "  wolf, 
whose  inventions,  heresies,  and  schisms  be  so  numerous 
that  the  flock  of  Christ  have  fed  on  jooisonous  shrubs 
for  want  of  wholesome  pastures."  ^  In  dealing  with 
this  faction,  however,  Elizabeth  showed  no  unnecessary 
intolerance.  The  Romanizing  bishops  promoted  by 
Mary  had,  indeed,  to  resign  their  sees  for  disavowing 
the  royal  supremacy.  But  they  were  not  confined  in 
prisons  like  their  predecessors  under  Edward  VI.,  nor 
were  they  necessarily  even  in  disgrace.  Save  when 
D'efractory,  they  were  comfortably  housed  with  the  new 
diocesans.  The  severity  with  which  certain  Eomanists 
were  treated  some  ten  years  later,  does  not  compel  us  to 
qualify  this  encomiam.  In  the  year  15C0  an  insurrec- 
tion was  hatched  by  the  foreign  seminarists.  In  1570 
Pius  Y.  issued  against  Elizabeth  a  bull  of  deposition, 
and  made  Rome  henceforth  the  centre  of  a  political 
conspiracy.  The  massacre  of  the  French  Protestants 
on  S.  Bartholomew's  Day,  1572,  was  oj)enly  approved 
of  by  this  Pope.  Jesuit  missionaries  were  found  in 
England  preaching  that  it  was  a  religious  duty  to 
assassinate  Elizabeth.  In  the  time  of  the  Armada 
they  openly  advocated  the  Spanish  cause.  That  such 
a  dangerous  form  of  political  disaffection  should  have 
been  checked  by  stringent  laws,  and  that  the  offenders, 
when  apprehended,  received  the  usual  barbarous  penalty 
of  high  treason,  need  not  surprise  us. 

For  the  other  extreme  of  faction  Elizabeth  must  have 


'  Strypc,  vol.  i.  pt.  i.  pp.  2lV,  218. 


ELIZABETH.  2S3 

had  naturally  a  deeper  aversion.    This  feeling,  however,      chap. 
motives  of  policy  compelled  her  usually  to  curb.     We    ^^-J-^ 
have   mentioned   the   flitrht   of  Reformino;  divines   in  ism  and  the 

.         .  .  .        ultra-Pro- 

Mary's  reign,  and  their  sojourn  m  the  centres  of  foreign  testants. 

Protestantism.  From  these  cities  of  refuge  too  many  of 
the  exiles  returned  with  lowered  views  of  Catholic 
doctrine  and  discipline.  A  formidable  contingent  was 
thus  added  to  the  noisy  anti-Catholic  faction.  Eliza- 
beth was  a  firm  believer  in  the  Apostolical  succession 
and  the  Real  Presence — doctrines  which  this  faction 
denounced  as  the  "  dregs  of  popery."  Had  her  hands 
been  free,  the  ultra-Protestant  clique  would  probably 
have  experienced  scarcely  more  tender  treatment  under 
Elizabeth  than  under  Henry  VIII.  Fortunately  the 
queen  was  hampered  by  the  uncompromising  attitude 
of  the  Romanists,  and  could  not  afford  to  alienate 
both  extremes.  For  the  present  the  ultra-Protestants 
escaped.  A  deference  was  even  shown  to  Puritan  sus-  Puritans 
ceptibilities  in  the  reformatory  measures  of  the  new  ^^^°^^®^- 
reign,  which  won  over  the  more  sober  minds  in  the 
faction.  The  Precisians,  for  the  most  part,  remained 
in  the  Anglican  communion :  some,  like  Jewel  and 
Home,  to  ripen  into  zealous  Churchmen ;  others,  like 
Parkhurst  and  Sandys,  to  trouble  our  Israel  with 
Puritan  crotchets.  Something  was  doubtless  sacrificed 
in  the  way  of  suggestive  ritual  and  venerable  customs 
for  the  sake  of  such  weak  brethren.  For  these  losses, 
liowever,  compensation  was  made  in  the  final  reforma- 
tory measures  of  1662.  Meanwhile  a  schism  was 
averted ;  tolerance  was  declared  tO'  be  the  rule  of  the 
Anglican  Church ;  and  the  Reformers  could  boast  that 
they  had  taken  from  Protestantism  everj^thing  that  was 
valuable,  without  damaging  the  catholicity  of  oui- 
Church.     The  ultra-Protestant  faction  experienced  no 


284 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


CHAr. 
XI. 

Sut  all 

Catholic 

essentials 

are 

conserved. 


severities   until    its    members    waxed   so    violent    and 
abusive  as  to  disturb  the  peace  of  England. 

Lest  this  compromise  should  be  misinterpreted,  we 
remind  the  student  that  Elizabeth's  conce!>sions  to 
the  ultra-Eefurmers  were  never  of  such  a  kind  as  to 
impair  the  catholicity  of  the  Church,  or  effect  a  breach 
of  continuity.  The  theory  of  the  modern  Dissenter 
is  that  our  Church's  existence  begins  at  some  hitherto 
undetermined  date,  when  Government  disestablished 
and  disendowed  a  Eoman  Church,  and  set  up  a  Re- 
formed Church  in  its  stead.  The  Church  is  thus  art- 
fully represented  as  a  Protestant  sect,  differing  from 
the  other  sects  only  in  the  enjoyment  of  peculiar 
patronage  from  the  secular  power.  This  fabrication 
has  been  as  successfully  crushed  by  the  forceps  of  his- 
torical fact  as  such  shadowy  myths  can  be.  With 
persons,  hov/ever,  to  whom  the  gratification  of  sectarian 
animosity  is  more  dear  than  truth,  it  still  finds  favour, 
as  also  with  the  ignorant  and  thoughtless.  At  the  risk, 
therefore,  of  wearying  the  well-informed  student  we 
detail  some  of  the  incontestable  facts, 
iiiustra-  "^tie  Church  of  England   under  Elizabeth  no  more 

^SncfVe^^^  jorofessed  to  be  a  different  body  from  the  Marian 
Church,  than — to  borrow  an  oft-cited  metaphor — a  man 
who  has  changed  his  clothes  professes  to  have  parted 
with  his  individuality.  With  few  exceptions,  the  same 
laity  worshipped  under  the  two  systems,  the  same 
clergy  officiated.  The  exact  number  of  Marian  clergy 
who  resigned  on  account  of  the  religious  changes  under 
Elizabeth  has  been  preserved.  It  included  189  only, 
out  of  a  clerical  force  of  9400.  These  were  the  only 
clergy  who  thought  that  repudiating  the  Pope  meant 
decatholicizing  the  Church.  It  was  foreseen  that 
enemies    might  bring   against   our  Church   this  false 


ELIZABETH.  285 

charge  of  a  schismatic  design.  The  greatest  pains  chap. 
were  therefore  taken  to  show  that  there  had  been  no  — J — - 
breach  of  continuity,  no  new  creation  in  the  English 
ecclesiastical  system.  Matthew  Parker,  the  new 
primate,  was  consecrated  with  the  strictest  regard  to 
Catholic  essentials.  Lest  there  should  be  a  shadow  of 
doubt  as  to  his  being  the  legitimate  successor  of 
Wolsey,  Cranmer,  and  Pole,  no  prelates  officiated  at 
his  consecration,  save  such  as  had  themselves  been 
consecrated  before  the  disorderly  reign  of  Edward  YI. 
As  nothing  was  introduced  into  our  Prayer-book  that 
could  de2:rade  the  Church  to  the  level  of  the  Protestant 
formations,  so  did  the  queen  resent  all  attempts  to  treat 
her  as  a  schismatic,  although  brought  by  political 
accident  into  alliance  with  the  Protestant  Powers. 
Pope  Pius  IV.,  after  his  offer  to  sanction  the  Prayer- 
book  was  refused,  addressed  the  queen  in  the  same 
terms  as  the  Protestant  pvinces  in  the  invitation  to  the 
Council  at  Trent.  An  indignant  remonstrance  was 
returned,  that  "  an  invidious  distinction  is  made  be- 
tween me  and  such  other  Catholic  potentates  as  have 
been  invited  to  this  Council  some  time  ago." 

We  resume  the  thread  of  our  story.     It  was  under-  The  queen 
stood   when   Mary   died,   on   November    17,    that   her  desire  pre- 
successor    was    averse   to   papal    supremacy,  but   the  change 
speed  with  which  the  rupture  with  Eome  was  effected 
was   probably  foreseen  by   no   one.      In   the   lengthy 
paper  of  agenda,  drawn  up  by  Elizabeth  and  Cecil  on 
that  very  day,  there  is  no  allusion  to  religious  changes. 
The  Pope  is  to  be  informed  of  Elizabeth's  accession,  as 
well  as  the  other  friendly  Powers.     The  only  memo- 
randum concerning  religion  is,  "  To  consider  the  con- 
dition of  the  preacher  of  Paul's  Cros^,  that  no  occasion 
be   given  by   him    to    stir  an^^   dispute  touching   the 


286  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

CHAP,      governance  of  the  realm."     The  old  Offices  continued 


XI. 


& 


to  be    used  at   the  Eucharistic  service,  and  remained 
authoritative  for  the  next  seven  months.     The  royal 
cha]3el  remained  in  the  same  state  as  in  Mary's  time, 
save   that   Elizabeth  objected  to  the  elevation  of  the 
concUict  of  host.      Pope   Paul   lY.,  however,  a  foolish,  hot-headed 
man,  had  heard  of  Elizabeth's  Eeforming  tendencies, 
and   chose   to  precipitate  the   rupture.     He  doubtless 
thought   that  a  young    queen    with    a    disputed    title 
would    not   be    able  to  resist  the  pretensions    of   the 
Holy  See.     He  wrote,  it  seems,  an  insolent  letter,  re- 
minding Elizabeth  that  she    had   been    declared    ille- 
gitimate, and  stating  that  her  accession  required  his 
sanction,   because   England   was   "held  in  fee  of  the 
Consequent  Apostolic  scc."     England  promptly  disproved  the  in- 
sinuation  by    passing    an    Act    which    declared    the 
queen    to    have    suj^reme   rule    over  all   her   subjects, 
and  disallowed  the  pretensions  of  all  foreign  potentates. 
This    insult    from    Eome    necessarily   prejudiced    the 
positions  of  those  persons  whose  consciences  did  not 
permit   them   to    disavow   papal   supremacy.     But   to 
nothing  else  in  the  mediiieval  system  besides  this  did 
Elizabeth   show    any  hostility.     In   her    Council    she 
retained   thirteen   of  her   sister's  advisers.      The   late 
queen  and  the    cardinal    were,  of  course,  buried  with 
the  ancient  Offices  (December  10).     At  Mary's  funeral, 
"White,  Bishop  of  Winchester,  spoke  violently  against 
changes  in  religion.     For  this  he  was  kept  to  his  house 
for  five  weeks,  then  brought  before  the  Council  and 
admonished.     It  was  found,   however,  now  as   in  the 
preceding  reign,  that  coercion  was  not  so  much  needed 
for  the  Romanists  as  for  the  other  extreme  of  faction. 
Many  of  the  Puritans  fondly  imagined  that  the  dis- 
orders of  King  Edward's  reign  were  about  to  be  restored. 


ELIZABETH.  287 

The  fugitive  divines  were  clamouring  for  livings;  the 
lay  "  evangelics  "  were  beginning  to  tear  down  images 
and   destroy   relics.     They   were  quickly  undeceived.  Tvirbuier.ca 
On  December  28  there  was  issued  a  royal  proclamation  "evanere 
very  like  that  which  appeared  on  Queen  Mary's  accession.  The  royai 
It  stated  that  certain  "  who  had  formerly  in  times  past  tk)°n.  ^"^^ 
the  ofSce  of  ministry  in  the    Church  "   had  convened  ^^''-  ^^^°- 
assemblies    and     raised     disputations,    especially     in 
London ;  "  whereupon  riseth  among  the  common  sort 
not  only  unfruitful  dispute  in  matters  of  religion,  but 
also  contention,  and  occasion  to  break  common  quiet." 
The    queen    orders,    therefore,    that    until    the   three 
estates  of  the  realm  be  consulted  with  on  the  subject, 
there  shall  be  no  alteration  in   the  established  forms 
of  worship,  except  that   the    English   Litany,  Lord's 
Prayer,  and  Creed  may  be  permitted. 

The  coronation  took  place  on  January  15,  with  the  mass  The 

„,,        T  •    1  1         1     1    •        ii      •     coronation. 

and  usual  ceremonies.  1  he  bishops  attended  m  their  jan.  1559. 
scarlet  robes,  all  except  Bonner,  who  (it  is  presumed") 
was  in  disgrace.  Heath,  the  Archbishop  of  York,  did 
not  officiate,  probably  because  he  could  not  demur  to 
Elizabeth's  prejudice  against  the  elevation  of  the  host. 
His  place  was  taken  by  Oglethorpe,  Bishop  of  Carlisle, 
who  agreed  to  meet  the  queen's  wishes  in  respect  to 
this  accessory. 

As  Cardinal  Pole's  successor  in  the  primacy,  the  Matthev^ 
queen  and  Cecil  thought  of  Matthew  Parker,  Dean  of  ^^^^®^* 
Lincoln  under  Edward  VI.  Parker  was  learned,  de- 
vout, and  sufficiently  removed  from  either  pole  of 
relififions  intolerance.  He  was  averse  to  the  restoration 
of  media3val  doctrine  in  Mary's  reign.  He  had  there- 
fore been  deprived  of  his  preferments.  He  had  not, 
however,  retired  to  the  Continent,  nor  had  he  any  sym- 
pathy with  what  he  called  the  "  Germanical  natures  " 


288 


ECCLESIA    ANGLICANA. 


Prayer- 
book 

revisionists 
appointed. 


of  the  self-exiled  divines.  His  desire  was,  not  to  con- 
form the  Church  to  Luther's  system  or  Calvin's  system, 
but  to  reform  by  "  imitating  and  following  the  example 
of  the  ancient  and  worthy  Fathers."  He  held,  in  fact, 
the  principles  which  found  favour  with  such  persons  as 
Cecil,  Bacon,  Paget,  Roger  Ascham,  and  Elizabeth  her- 
self. Parker  had  lived  quietly  in  Mary's  reign,  and 
had  nothing  to  complain  of  beyond  the  loss  of  his 
preferments.^  Early  in  1559,  Parker  was  summoned  to 
London  to  confer  with  his  friend  Cecil  on  the  course 
religious  reform  should  take.  What  the  queen  and 
Cecil  desired  was  a  restoration  of  the  First  Praj'er-book 
of  Edward  VI.  To  this  proceeding  Parker  himself 
probably  objected,  on  the  ground  that  it  would  drive 
the  "  Germanical  natures  "  entirely  out  of  the  English 
communion.  The  queen  would  have  to  contend  against 
Romanist  malcontents,  including  some  of  the  most  in- 
fluential clergy;  it  would  be  imperatively  necessary 
not  to  swell  the  numbers  of  the  anti-Catholic  faction. 
A  revision  of  the  Second  Prayer-book  suggested  itself 
as  a  wiser  expedient.  This  and  other  measures  of  eccle- 
siastical reform  were  put  into  the  hands  of  a  small  com- 
mittee, including  not  only  Reformers  'of  the  old  school, 
but  also  some  of  the  Puritan  party.  The  names  of  the 
committee  were  Parker,  Pilkington,  Hill,  May,  Cox, 
Grindal,  Whitehead,  and  Sir  Thomas  Smith,  who  appears 
to  have  attended  as  representative  of  the  Crown. ^ 

1  That  he  escaped  thus  easily  suggests  that  the  severities  of  the  late  reign  have 
been  exaggerated  by  such  historians  as  Foxe  and  Burnet.  For  there  is  good  reason 
to  believe  that  Parker  had  gone  the  length  of  implicating  himself  in  Northumber- 
land's conspiracy  in  favour  of  Lady  Jane.  Yet  he  had  lived  through  the  years  of 
the  Marian  persecution,  not  indeed  iu  enjoyment  of  court  favour  like  Ascham,  or 
Dr.  Wright,  or  Cecil— all  of  them  men  confessedly  anxious  for  a  religious  Refornia- 
lion— but  "  as  a  private  individual "  "  happy  before  God,"  and  finding  in  "delight- 
ful literary  leisure  greater  and  more  solid  enjoyments  than  my  former  busy  and 
dangerous  kind  of  life  ever  offered  me." 

"sBesides  conferring  with  Parker,  Cecil  meanwhile  had  circulated  questions 


ELIZABETH.  289 

Parliament    opened   on   January    25.      Sir   Nicholas      chap. 

Bacon  was  the  interpreter  of  the  royal  intentions.     On     _^: 

the   one   hand,  nothing:   was  to  *'be   advised   or  done  The  new 
which  .  .  .  were  likely  to  breed  or  nourish  any  kind  meat. 
of  idolatry  or  superstition,  ...  so,  on  the  other  side, 
heed   is   to   be   taken   that  by  no  licentious   or   loose 
handling   any   manner   of   occasion   be   given   to   any 
contempt  or  irreverent  behaviour  towards  God  or  godly 
things."  1     The  relative  positions  of  the  Churjh  and 
the  throne  had  to  be  determined  before  ecclesiastical 
leojislation  could  be  entered  on.     Theoretically,  at  least, 
Elizabeth's  claims  in  this  regard  were  only  what  an 
overwhelming  majority  of   English  Catholics  had  for 
centuries  acknowledged.    Disowning  as  impious  Henry's 
new-coined   title    "Head   of   the    Church,"    the  queen 
challenged  no  other  authority  than  that  which  "  was 
of  ancient  time  due  to  the  imperial  crown  of  the  realm, 
that  is,  under  God  to  have  sovereignty  and  rule  over 
all  manner  of  persons."^     The  title  adopted  by  Eliza-  The 
beth   was    "  supreme   governor."      Thus    limited,    the  governor- 
principle  of  the  royal  supremacy  would  have  certainly  ^^^^ 
been  accepted  by  most  Catholics  of  the  pree-Reformation 
period.     The  leading  ecclchiastics,  however,  were  now 
fairly    committed    to    a    papal — as    distinct    from    a 

among  men  of  all  parties  as  to  the  ecclesiastical  policy  to  be  adopted.  The 
answers  were,  of  course,  of  varying  cimiplexion.  One  of  them  deserves  attention 
as  illustrating  the  difficulties  of  the  situation.  From  this  "device  offered  to  Secre- 
tary Cecil  "  we  learn  that  it  was  daily  expected  that  the  Pope  would  excommuni- 
cate Elizabeth  and  invite  the  Roman  Catholic  sovereigns  to  a  crusade.  The  claims 
of  Mary  Stuart  might  be  supported  by  France,  Scotland,  and  Ireland.  Among 
men  of  the  "papist  sect"  this  opposition  might  find  supporters.  Such  was  one 
danger  to  be  ajtprehended.  On  the  other  hand,  another  and  greater  danger  lay  in 
the  bigotry  of  the  Puritans.  There  were  some  who,  when  they  saw  many  of  the 
old  ceremonies  retained  and  the  doctrines  of  the  foreign  Protestants  disallowed, 
•'would  call  the  alteration  a  clokf^d  papistry  or  a  mingli'-mangle."  The  device 
continues,  "  It  is  better  that  they  should  suffer  than  that  her  highness  or  the 
commonwealth  should  shake  or  bi^  in  danger." 

'  D'Ewes,  Journals  of  Q.  Eliz.  Parliam.,  p.  12.  -  Eliz.  Injunctions,  vi. 

U 


290 


ECCLESIA    ANGLICANA. 


The 

■'  Spolia- 
tion Bills. 


The  conge 
d  elire. 


Catholic — cause.  Powerful  speeches  were  made  by 
Archbishop  Heath  and  Bishop  Scott  against  the  Supre- 
macy Act.  This  Act  became  law  on  April  29.  In 
view  of  the  probable  disloyalty  of  the  opponent  faction, 
it  required  all  clergymen,  magistrates,  and  officers  to 
take  an  oath  acknowledging  the  queen's  supremacy. 

The  deplorable  financial  condition  of  England  is  the 
only  excuse  that  can  be  made  for  the  "  Spoliation  Bills," 
which  passed  on  March  2  and  April  6.  By  one  of 
these  the  firstfiuits  and  tenths  of  ecclesiastical  benefices 
were  again  attached  to  the  Crown.  By  the  other  the 
queen  was  empowered,  on  the  avoidance  of  a  see,  to 
take  what  manors  she  should  choose,  giving  in  exchange 
impropriate  tithes.  This  revival  of  the  policy  of  Henry 
VIII.  and  Edward  VI.  was  not  only  bravely  resisted 
by  the  lords  spiritual,  but  opposed  b}^  a  large  minority 
in  the  Commons.  Some  ten  sees  were  at  this  time 
vacant.  The  timely  windfall  more  than  replenished 
the  exhausted  exchequer ;  the  excess  was  spent  in  sub- 
sidizing court  favourites.  A  great  impoverishment  of 
the  Church  was  the  necessary  consequence.  In  ex- 
clianse  for  lands  and  manors  the  diocesans  received 
ill-paid  tenths  and  the  dilapidated  parsonages  formerly 
belonging  to  the  monasteries.  The  iniquity  of  the 
transaction  was  boldly  depicted  by  Dr.  Cox,  Bishop- 
elect  of  Ely,  in  two  letters  to  the  queen. ^ 

In  her  exposition  of  the  supremacy  the  queen  had 
echoed,  not  the  opinions  of  Henry  VIII.  or  her  brother's 
Erastian  Council,  but  those  maintained  b}^  the  patriot 
statesmen  of  old  times.  Similarly,  she  disowned  the 
unconstitutional  practice  obtaining  in  those  two  reigns 
of  appointing  bishops  by  letters  patent  from  the  Crown. 
The  conge  d'elire  was  re-established,  subject  to  the  same 

'    The  letters  may  be  found  in  Strype,  Annals,  i.  pt.  i.  pp.  1-44,  sqq. 


ELIZABETH.  291 

rule  as  had  obtained  before  the  reign  of  Henry  VIII., 
that  the  Crown  directed  the  choice  of  the  chapter  by 
nominating  a  candidate  or  candidates.  This  arrange- 
ment subsists  at  the  present  time.  The  difference  be- 
tween a  Government  appointment  so  qualified  and  one 
in  which  the  Church  has  no  voice  will  appear  fanciful 
only  to  the  unreflecting.  Had  "letters  patent"  become 
part  of  the  Anglican  system,  the  Church  could  claim  no 
redress  should  an  unorthodox  or  even  unordained  person 
be  appointed  to  a  bishopric.  As  it  is,  the  appointment 
of  a  bishop  suspected  of  heterodoxy  is  a  legitimate 
grievance;  the  appointment  of  a  layman,  common 
enough  in  Germany,  would  here  be  impossible. 

The    proo-ress  of   Reformatory  mensures   was   satis-  convoca- 
^     *=■  "  tion  re- 

factory  to  Parker,  Scory,  and  other  dignitaries;  but  the  actionary. 

Marian  bishops  had  gained  the  suffrages  of  the  Lower 
House  of  Convocation,  and  for  a  time  it  appeared  as 
if  a  large  proportion  of  the  clergy  was  hopelessly 
alienated  from  the  cause  of  reformation.  The  ex- 
periences of  the  clerical  body  under  Edward  sufficiently 
justified  a  strong  prejudice  against  anti-papal  policy. 
It  is  not  surprising  to  find  that  at  a  time  when  "  Spo- 
liation Bills  "  were  in  progress,  Convocation  pronounced 
in  favour  of  papal  supremacy  and  the  dogma  of  tran- 
substantiation.  These  principles  certainly  had  no  hold 
on  the  bulk  of  the  clergy,  but  were  deemed  preferable 
to  royal  aggression  and  "  sacramentarian "  profanit}-, 
seemingly  the  only  possible  alternatives.  The  prejudice 
against  royal  supremacy  was  shaken  b}^  Elizabeth's 
persistent  disclaimer  of  all  desire  to  obtrude  on  spiritual 
prerogative  ;  the  sovereign's  example  in  her  own  chapel 
showed  that  belief  in  the  Real  Presence  did  not  require 
to  be  bolstered  up  by  the  materialistic  dogma  of 
Paschasius  Radbertus.    The  clergy  were  satisfied.     The 


292  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

sacrificial  efficacy  of  the  Eucharist  remained,  as  it  is 
still,  a  moot  question  in  the  Anglican  communion. 
The  majority  of  those  who  became  bishops  did  not 
acce^Dt  it ;  those,  however,  of  the  clergy  who  continued 
to  teach  it  were  not  regarded  as  acting  in  defiance 
of  the  revised  Prayer-book,  much  less  was  any  endea- 
vour made  to  oust  them  from  their  preferments.  The 
main  ground  of  difference  between  Anglican  and 
Eomanist  Avas  henceforth  to  be  papal  supremacy.  If 
a  clergyman  disowned  the  mediaeval  theory  of  Eoman 
prerogative  by  taking  the  prescribed  oath,  his  view 
of  the  Eucharist  would  certainly  not  bring  him  into 
trouble;  in  some  cases  even  non-acceptance  of  the 
revised  Prayer-book  doubtless  passed  unnoticed.  It 
was  not  till  1571  that  attempt  was  made  to  enforce  a 
closer  conformity  of  doctrine. 
The  Eliza-        Meanwhile   much  was   done  which   mip;ht  well   be 

bethan  ^  ... 

Prayer-  regarded  as  an  infringement  on  the  liberties  of  the 
A D^i559.  Church.  The  committee  appointed  by  the  queen  had  to 
effect  the  revision  of  the  Prayer-book  without  the 
sanction  of  Convocation.  The  new  edition,  moreover, 
did  not  reach  that  level  to  which  Elizabeth  liad  hoped 
to  raise  Edward's  Second  Prayer-book,  and  which  it 
might  have  been  expected  to  attain  under  the  auspices 
of  such  a  divine  as  Parker.  The  defect  must  be  ac- 
counted for  by  Parker's  illness  and  his  nomination  of 
Dr.  Guest,  a  divine  of  Puritan  proclivities,  to  take  his 
place  on  the  committee.  Cecil  communicated  to  the 
committee  the  queen's  wish  that  crucifixes,  processions, 
prayers  for  the  dead,  and  reception  of  the  consecrated 
elements  in  the  mouth  should  be  sanctioned.  She  also 
desired  that  the  celebrant  should  have  a  distinctive 
dress,  and  that  non-communicants  slmuld  attend  at  the 
performance    of  the    Church's    gieat   act   of    worship. 


ELIZABETH.  293 

While  this  was  the  mind  of  the  queen,  four  at  least  of      '  "  ^i'- 

the    commissioners — Whitehead,    Grindal,    Pilkington,     ^-U— ^ 

and  Guest — were  bent  on  making  large  concessions  to 

the  Puritan  party.     The  course  of  the  negotiations  is 

not  easily  traced,  but  it  can  scarcely  be  doubted  that  Theaueen's 

r\  jj  J    !•  xi        influence 

the  prescription  as  to  "  Ornaments  emanated  irom  the  apparent. 
Queen  herself.  Henceforth  the  minister  was  to  use  "at 
the  time  of  the  Communion,  and  at  all  other  times  of 
his  ministration,  .  .  .  such  ornaments  in  the  Church 
as  were  in  use  by  authority  of  Parliament  in  the 
second  year  of  Edward  VI."  This  direction  was 
accepted  as  a  rubric  at  the  revision  of  the  Prajer-book 
in  1662.  It  Avas  doubtless  by  the  same  authority  that 
the  "  Black  Piubric  "  of  Edward's  Second  Prayer-book, 
which  apologizes  for  the  act  of  kneeling  at  Holy 
Communion,  was  struck  out.^  Seldom  has  the  Church 
had  such  reason  for  condoning  royal  interference  in 
matters  spiritual.  The  "Act  of  Uniformity"  which 
sanctioned  the  new  Prayer-book  pretended  that  it 
was  all  but  identical  with  the  Second  Prayer-book  of 
Edward  VI.  It  makes  a  most  cursory  mention  of 
the  alterations,  and  says  nothing  about  the  omit;sion 
of  the  "  Black  Eubric."  It  may  be,  as  Mr.  Perry 
supposes,^  that  the  queen  manipulated  the  new  for- 
mulary after  the  "  Act  of  Uniformity "  had  been 
passed.  Doubtless,  however.  Parliament,  conscious  of 
the  irregularity  of  publishing  a  Prayer-book  without 
the  sanction  of  Convocation,  was  desirous  that  it  should 
pass  as  the  authorized  Prayer-book  of  1552  revived. 
Perhaps  this  tendency  to  minimize  the  difference 
between  the  two  books  will  sufficiently  account  for  the 
Act's  silence  on  the  subject  of  the  "  Black  Rubric."     In  The  "Orna- 

'  This  was  reinserted  in  a  modified  form  in  1C62. 
-  Terry,  Student's  English  Church  History,  p.  261. 


294  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

ciiAr.      the  Act  the   Ornaments  prescription  takes  this  form  : 

— '-J—     "  such  ornaments  of  the  Church   and  of  the  minister 

^3?-^*®   „      thereof  bhall  be  retained  and  be  in  use  as  was  in  this 

Kubric. 

Church  of  England  by  authority  of  Parliament  in  the 
second  j^ear  of  Edward  YI.,  imtil  further  order  shall  he 
therein  taken  by  authority  of  the  queen's  majesty."  ^  No 
further  order  was  taken.  That  one  party  in  the  Church 
obeyed  the  prescription,  and  wore  what  contemporary 
Puritans  called  "  the  execrable  garments  of  the  ungodly 
mass  priests,"  has  been,  we  think,  sufficiently  proven.'- 
An  antagonistic  and  increasing  faction  hated  even  the 
surplice.  To  press  the  rubric  on  these  persons  would 
have  been  impolitic.  That  minimum  of  ornament  which 
was  enforced  by  Parker's  "  Advertisements  "  of  1566  was 
at  last  seldom  exceeded.  Copes,  if  not  other  vestments, 
were  worn  in  the  cathedrals  and  in  the  royal  chapels. 
The  parish  churches  did  not  aspire  above  the  surplice. 
"Act of  The  "Act  of  Uniformity"  enforced  the  use  of  the 

ity^-  new  Pra3'er-book  on  and  after  June  24,  under  penalties 

f^]."^^®'  similar  to  those  of  the  Act  of  1549.  But  there  is  no 
reason  to  believe  that  this  statute  was  pressed  as  the  "  Act 
of  Supremacy"  was.     The  object  of  the  queen  was  to 

'  It  has  been  contended  that  this  clause  has  in  view  a  future  curtailing  of 
ritual.  Judged,  however,  by  the  contf^xt  and  by  contemporary  criticisms,  it  appears 
to  mean  that  the  queen  hoprd  to  add  to  the  prescriptions  on  the  subject.  The  Act 
continues  thus :  "  And  also  that  if  there  shall  happen  any  contempt  or  irreverence 
to  be  used  in  the  ceremonies  or  rites  of  the  Church,  by  the  misusing  of  the  orders 
appointed  in  this  book,  the  queen's  maji  sty  may  by  the  like  advice  .  .  .  ordain  and 
publish  such  further  ceremonies  or  rites  as  may  be  most  for  the  advancement  of 
God's  glory,  the  edifying  of  His  Church,  and  the  due  reverence  of  Christ's  holy 
mysteries  and  sacraments."  The  Puritan  George  Withers  crtainly  regarded  the 
clause  about  "  further  order  "  as  dangerous  to  his  party.  He  laments  not  only  that 
the  ancient  ceremonies  were  "restored  under  the  same  name,"  but  "that  power 
moreover,  was  given  to  the  queen  and  the  archbishop  to  introduce  whiitev^r 
additional  ceremonies  they  might  think  proper."  He  regards  the  admonition  sub- 
stituting round  wafers  for  the  common  bread  of  Edward's  reign  as  issued  with  this 
warrant.    (See  Zurich  Letters,  2nd  Series,  pp.  150,  161.) 

-  See  MaccoU,  Lawlessness,  Sacerdotalit^m,  and  Ritualism,  p.  66  and  seqq.,  and 
Prefaces  to  second  and  third  editions. 


1559. 


ELIZABETH.  295 

humour  religious  scruple  so  long  as  it  did  not  involve      chap. 
acknowledgment  of  the  Pope.       That  neither  she  nor     — 1^— - 
Parker  were  quite  satisfied  with  the  low  standard  of  the  ^nd  pJ--^" 
Elizabethan  Prayer-book  must  indeed  have  been  noto-  matedecue 

•^  a  nigner 

rious.  The  altar  in  her  private  chapel,  with  its  crucifix  standard. 
and  lighted  candles,  showed  the  queen's  proclivities. 
Parker's  were  expressed  by  his  conduct  when  called  upon 
to  provide  a  Latin  Prayer-book  for  the  college  chapels 
in  Oxford,  Cambridge,  Eton,  and  Winchester.  Instead 
of  translating  the  new  Prayer-book  into  Latin,  he  pro- 
vided a  Latin  translation  of  the  Prayer-book  of  1549.  This 
Latin  form  of  the  Prayer-book  was  even  commended  to 
the  notice  of  the  parochial  clergy,  who  were  authorized 
to  take  the  dailj'  Offices  of  matins  and  evensong  from 
this  formulary  when  there  was  no  congregation  present. 
From  Parker,  too,  the  universities  received  a  formu- 
lary to  be  used  "in  commendationibus  benefactorum." 
Here  that  communion  between  the  Church  militant 
and  the  saints  departed  which  the  new  Prayer-book 
had  ignored  was  expressed  with  sufficient  plainness. 
By  such  proceedings  those  who  had  dreaded  that 
"reformation"  now,  as  in  Edward's  time,  meant  "de- 
catholicizing,"  were  reconciled  to  Elizabeth's  regime} 

The  number  of  clergy  who  were  deprived  for  refusing  The  Marian 
the  oath  of  supremacy,  or  for  demurring  to  the  English    ^^  °^'" 
Offices,  amounted  in  all  to  only  189  out  of  94U0.     This 
number  included,  however,  no  less  than  fimrteen  bishops.^ 
The  episcopal  representatives  of  the  Old  Learning  had 
almost  to  a  man  thrown  in  their  lot  with  "popery." 

'  Or  in  the  phraseology  of  Neal,  the  Puritan  historian,  "  by  this  method  most  of 
the popis/i  laity  were  deceived  into  conformity."  The  *'  popish  laity  "  are,  of  course, 
those  who  would  not  liave  tolerated  the  substitution  of  a  sect  for  a  Catholic  Church. 
Mr.  Soames  points  out  that  these  deluded  persons  amounted  to  about  two-thirds  of 
the  entire  population. 

^  The  bishops  were  followed  by  eighty  rectors,  fifty  prebendaries,  fifteen  masters 
of  colleges,  twelve  archdeacons,  twelve  deans,  si.\  abbots. 


The  dis- 


296  ECCLESIA    ANGLICANA. 

CHAP,      '-l^^^y  had  completely  misread  Elizabeth's  character,  and 

xij presumed  that  she  would  not  dare  to  act  in  defiance  of  the 

Holy  See.    They  were  convinced  that  renunciation  of  the 

Pope  would  bring  on  a  revolution.     In  this  case  they 

would  side  with  Philip  or  Mary  Stuart,  or  any  other 

2)retender  whose  cause  the  Pope  should  sanction.     De 

Quadra,  Bishop  of  Aquila,  a  subtle  Spanish  ecclesiastic, 

had  been  sent  as  ambassador  to  England  for  the  express 

purpose  of  encouraging  these  anticipations.-^ 

So   strongly  had  the  Lower  House  of  Convocation 

putation  at  protested  against  Elizabeth's  invasion  of  the  rio;hts  of 
■West-  ...  .  .  ? 

minster       the  Spirituality,  that  it  was  deemed  advisable  to  give  the 

Komanist  partisans  the  privilege  of  defending  their  cause 

in  a  public  disputation.     Eight  divines  were  selected 

liom  each  side  to  argue  in  Westminster  Abbey  on  the 

following  questions: — (1)  Whether  it  is  against  the 

Word  of  God  and  the  custom  of  the  ancient  Church  to 

officiate  and  administer  the  sacraments  in  a  language 

unknown  to  the  people.    (2)  Whether  every  Church  has 

authority  to  appoint,  change,  or  set   aside  ceremonies 

and  ecclesiastical  rites,  provided  the  same  be  done  to 

edifying.      (3)  Whether  it  can  be  proved  in  the  Word 

of  God  that  there  is  offered  in  the  mass  a  propitiatory 

fsacrifice  for  the  quick  and  the  dead.    For  the  Eomanists 

appeared  Bishops  White,  Bayne,   Scott,  and  Watson, 

with  Cole,  Harpsfield,  Langdale,   and  Chadsey.     The 

lleformers  were  represented  by  Bishop  Scory,  with  Cox, 

Home,  Aylmer,  Whitehead,  Grindal,  Guest,  and  Jewel. 

The  Eomanists  had  agreed  that  they  should  speak  first, 

and  the  Reformers  reply.     On  the  second  morning  of 

the  debate  they  objected  to  this  arrangement,  as  giving 

a  palpable  advantage  to  their  antagonists.    An  angry 

discussion  succeeded,  in  which  White  and  Watson  made 

*  P>ou(le,  History  of  England,  vol.  vi.  p.  200, 


ELIZABETH,  297 

themselves  particularly  offensive.     In  vain  did  tlie  new      chap. 
lord  keeper,  Bacon,  who  presided,  and  Archbishop  Heath     v_l^__ 
who  acted  as  Bacon's  assessor,  urge  the  Romanist  cham- 
pions to  speak  to  the  question.     The  lord  keeper,  forced  Aprils, 
to  dissolve  the  meeting,  remarked,  "For  that  ye  would  not  ^^^^' 
that  we  should  hear  you,  perhaps  you  may  shortly  hear 
of  us."     The  threat  was  fulfilled.     White  and  Watson  punish- 

„  .        -1  J.1  mentoftwo 

were  committed  to  the  lower  tor  contempt;  tne  other  bisiiops. 
Romanist  champions  were  confined  for  a  time  to  the 
boundaries  of  London  and  Westminster,  and   had    to 
report  themselves  daily  to  the  Council.    These  severities 
are  intelligible  when  we  find  that  for  the  sake  of  this 
barren  controversy  the  business  of  both  Houses  of  Par- 
liament had  been  suspended.     After  the  passing  of  the 
"•  Act  of  Supremacy  "  it  was  plain  that  the  malcontent 
prelates  must  submit,  or  suffer  deprivation.    On  May  15 
Archbishop    Heath,    with   thirteen   nonjuring   bishops 
and  other  divines,  were  summoned  before  the  queen  in 
council.     To  the  queen's  remonstrances  Heath  replied 
by  recalling   "  her  gracious  sister's  zeal  unto  the  holy 
see  of  S.  Peter's  at  Rome,"  and  urging  that  a  contrary 
policy  would  bring  on  the  realm  "  perpetual  ignominy 
and  curse."  ^    The  queen,  however,  denied  that  Mary's 
conduct  necessarily  affected  her  own  policy.     "  It  is," 
she  said,  "  by  diving  into  and  following  the  pioceedings 
which  have  come  down  to  me  from  a  long  line  of  pre- 
decet^sors  that  I  mean  to  rule,  and  I  hope  that  in  this 
my  successor  will  follow  my  example.     To  no  power 
whatever  is  my  crown  subject,  save  to  that  of  Christ, 
the    King    of    kings."       The    bishops   were   silenced. 
Kitchin  of   Llandaff    consented    to    take    the    oath    of 
supremacy.     The  others  were  deprived,  but  experienced  Nonjming 
a  leniency  which  contrasts  favourably  with  the  treat-  deprived. 

'  See  Strype,  i.  pt.  i.  p.  207. 


298 


ECCLESIA    ANGLICANA. 


CHAP. 

xr. 


■with 

sevei'ity 


The  Coiu-t 
of  High 
Com- 
mission. 


ment  of  "  expulsed  "  bishops  in  the  two  preceding  reigns. 
Heath  lived  at  his  own  house  near  Windsor,  and  was 
often  visited  by  the  queen.  The  usual  plan,  however, 
was  to  house  a  nonjuring  with  a  conforming  bishop, 
the  host  being  made  responsible  for  his  guest's  con- 
Not  treated  tinuance  in  England.  Commonly  this  strange  alliance 
ended  in  friendship  and  mutual  respect.  Bonner, 
however,  the  most  unfavourable  specimen  of  the  Marian 
episcopate,  soon  quarrelled  with  his  custodian,  the  Bishop 
of  Lincoln.  He  was  therefore  compelled  to  occupy 
a  house  within  the  rule  or  radius  of  the  Marshalsea 
prison.  Watson  was  found  pleaching  treason,  and  was 
imprisoned  for  the  rest  of  his  life  in  Wisbech  Castle. 

Before  the  issue  of  this  conflict  with  the  Romanizing 
bishops  was  reached,  Elizabeth  had  armed  herself  with 
a  formidable  weapon  by  securing  parliamentary  sanction 
for  the  Court  of  High  Commission.  Nothing  but  the 
queen's  own  religious  principles  prevented  this  new 
court  from  being  employed  in  such  a  way  as  to  sap 
the  foundations  of  the  Church.  Its  encroachments  on 
the  other  courts  in  the  reigns  following,  and  their 
connection  with  the  overthrow  of  Charles  I.,  are 
known  to  every  student  of  English  history.  The  ex- 
ceptional state  of  ecclesiastical  aifairs  in  the  year  1559 
was  the  only  apology  for  its  institution,  and  when  the 
crisis  had  passed  the  extraordinary  power  delegated  to 
the  Crown  ought  to  have  been  cancelled.  The  legal 
sanction  for  this  court  was  a  clause  in  the  "  Act  of 
Supremacy,"  which  authoiized  the  queen  and  her  suc- 
cessors to  appoint  a  commission  "  to  visit,  reform, 
redress,  order,  correct,  and  amend  all  such  errors, 
heresies,  schisms,  abuses,  offences,  contempts,  and 
enoimities,  which,  by  any  manner  of  spiritual  or  eccle- 
siastical power,  authority,  or  jurisdiction,  can  or  may 


ELIZABETH.  299 

lawfully  be  reformed,  ordered,  redressed,  corrected,  or      chap. 
amended."      Nothing,   however,    was   to   be   adjudged     ^J^,L^ 
heresy  which  had  not  been  of  old  so  adjudged  in  pro- 
vincial synods  or  General  Councils,  or   should  be  so 
determined  by  Parliament  with  the  assent  of  Convo- 
cation. 

Under  this  sanction  a  body  of  commissioners  visited  Thevisita- 
the  dioceses  this  summer.  The  leading  commissioners  dioceses, 
were  Matthew  Parker,  Edmund  Grindal,  Thomas  Smith, 
Walter  Haddon,  Thomas  Sackford,  Eichard  Goodrick, 
and  Gilbert  Gerrard.  One  of  these  six  was  to  be  present 
at  each  visitation.  They  were  charged  to  suspend 
immoral  clergymen,  to  restore  such  as  had  been  illegally 
displaced,  to  allow  pensions  to  those  who  refused  the 
oath  of  supremacy,  to  report  on  the  true  state  of  churches, 
and  to  distribute  everywhere  a  body  of  "  Injunctions,'* 
compiled  probably  by  the  Prayer-book  commission.^  . 
AVe  have  already  observed  that  few  clergymen  were  de- 
prived, and  that  it  was  the  queen's  intention  that  all 
should  be  done  in  a  concessory  spirit.  The  intolerance, 
however,  of  some  of  the  commissioners  far  exceeded 
their  instructions,  and  in  certain  districts  they  sanctioned 
most  unjustifiable  outrages  on  what  they  considered 
"  superstitious  ornaments."  The  churches  in  London 
])articularly  suffered.  The  rood  and  high  altar  at 
S.  Paul's  were  desecrated ;  "  the  rood  and  Mary  and 
John"  at  S.  Magnus,  Fish  Street,  and  at  S.  Botolph, 
Billingsgate,  were  burnt.  Churchyard  crosses  were  in 
some  places  pulled  down.^ 

The  first  twenty-eight   of  the  "  Injunctions "  were  The  "in- 
junctions." 

'  So  Strype  and  Cardwell.  Dean  Hook  remarks,  however,  that  "  it  is  more  than 
doubtful "  whether  the  commission  "  as  a  body  would  have  given  their  assent 
to  all  the  '  Injunctions.'  We  may  with  more  confidence  attribute  them  to  Parker 
ftiid  Cecil :  the  latter,  we  know,  revised  them." — Archbishops,  "  Matthew  Parker," 
p.  226. 

'^  See  Strype,  Annals,  I.  pt.  i.  p.  254. 


300  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

CHAP,      based  on  those  published  by  Edward's  Council  in  154-' 


XI. 


The  following  prescriptions  may  be  noticed  : — 

II.  The  clergy  are  charged  not  to  "set  forth  or  extol  the 
dignity  of  any  images,  rehcs,  or  miracles."  (In  Edward's  "  In- 
junctions "  the  destruction  of  images  and  relics  is  ordered.)  III. 
The  clergy  are  to  preach  one  sermon  in  every  month,  exhorting 
their  hearers  to  works  of  mercy  and  charity,  and  not  to  such 
works  "  devised  by  men's  fantasies  "  as  pilgrimages,  setting  up 
candles,  praying  on  beads,  etc.  VI.  An  English  Bible  and 
the  Paraphrase  of  Erasmus  to  be  set  up  in  the  churches.  X. 
Registers  of  baptisms,  marriages,  and  burials  to  be  kept  in  the 
churches.  XVIII.  Processions  in  church  or  churchyard  for- 
bidden, as  engendering  contention  and  strife, "  by  reason  of  fond 
courtesy  and  challenging  of  places  in  the  procession."  XXII. 
It  shall  be  taught  that  no  man  ought  "  obstinately  and  ma- 
liciously to  break  and  violate  the  laudable  ceremonies  of  the 
Church."  (The  "  Injunction  "  of  1547  had  also  protested  against 
superstitious  abuse  of  ceremonies :  this  protest  is  left  out.) 
XXIII.  "  Monuments  of  feigned  miracles,  pilgrimages,  idolatry, 
and  superstition/'  such  as  "  shrines  .  .  .  tables,  candlesticks, 
trindals,  rolls  of  wax,  pictures,  paintings,"  are  to  be  destroyed. 
XXVII.  One  of  the  Homilies  to  be  read  every  Sunday.  XXIX.^ 
Offence  having  been  given  by  "  lack  of  discreet  behaviour  in 
many  ^  ministers  .  .  .  both  in  choosing  of  their  wives  and  in- 
discreet living  with  them,"  no  priest  or  deacon  shall  hereafter 
marry  without  the  consent  of  the  bishop  and  two  neighbouring 
justices,  nor  without  the  good  will  of  the  bride's  parents  or 
guardians.  Masters,  deans,  and  heads  of  colleges  are  not  to  marry 
without  permission  from  the  visitor.  XLIV.  Clergy  are  to  in- 
struct the  young  fur  at  least  half  an  hour  before  evening  prayer 
every  holiday  and  every  other  Sunday,  in  the  Commandments, 
Creed,  Lord's  Prayer,  and  Catechism.  XLVII.  The  church- 
wardens are  to  give  the  visitors  an  inventory  of  copes  and  other 

'  "Injunctions"  XXIX.-LIII.  have  no  counterpart  in  Edward's  "Injunctions," 
with  the  exception  of  XXXIX.,  the  "Injunction"  requiring  the  exclusive  use  f 
King  Henry's  Latin  grammar. 

-  This,  of  course,  is  merely  a  testimony  to  Elizabeth's  well-known  aversion  to 
clerical  marriages.  The  statute  on  the  subject  was  still  that  of  1552,  which  (pre- 
sumably by  some  oversight)  had  not  been  repealed  in  the  reign  of  Mary. 


altars. 


ELIZABETH.  301 

ornaments,  "  vestments,  plate,  and  books,  and  specially  of  grails,  chap. 
couchers,  legends,  processionals,"  etc.^  L.  People  are  to  live  in  — 1.— ^ 
charity,  and  not  use  "  convicious  words,"  as  "  papist  or  papistical 
heretic,  schismatic,  or  sacramentary."  LI.  To  stop  the  spread 
of  "unfruitful,  vain,  and  infamous  books  and  papers,"  no  books 
are  to  be  published  without  the  imprimatur  of  the  ordinary,  and 
the  bishop  or  archbishop  or  chancellor  of  the  university.  LII. 
The  people  are  to  kneel  in  time  of  the  Litany  and  all  other 
prayers,  and  whensoever  the  name  of  Jesus  is  pronounced  "due 
reverence  "  is  to  "  be  made  of  all  persons,  young  and  old." 

In  an  admonition  attached  to  the  "  Injunctions "  The  ad- 
directlons  are  given  for  the  placing  of  altars.  It  will  STJJJt^"'^ 
be  remembered  that  the  Act  of  Edward  VI.  had  aimed 
at  transforming  the  altars  into  tables.  This  Act  was 
now  law,  since  all  the  religious  legislation  of  Mary  had 
been  repealed.  The  Puritan  faction  were  clamouring 
for  more  desecrations.  They  addressed  a  petition 
against  altars  to  the  queen.  Her  Majesty  is  informed 
that  the  "  greatest  learned  men  of  the  world,  as  Bucer, 
CEcolampadius,  Zninglius,  Bullinger,  Calvin,  etc.,  etc. 
.  .  .  have  in  their  reformed  churches  .  .  .  always  taken 
away  the  altars;  only  Luther  and  his  churches  have 
retained  them."  In  the  directions  att-iched  to  the 
"  Injunctions  "  we  detect  the  diplomatic  skill  of  Eliza- 
beth. To  openly  pronounce  in  favour  of  altais  was 
impossible  in  the  present  position  of  parties.  But  a 
modification  could  be  devised  such  as  would  protect  the 
ancient  use,  save  only  in  parishes  where  tlie  incumbent 
and  churchwardens  were  Puritans.  To  tliese  function- 
aries was  now  committed  the  settlement  of  the  burnino- 
question.     If  they  did  remove  an  altar,  they  were  to  do 

'  This  donbtlrps  means  that  the  Church  ornaments  and  devotional  literature 
were  to  be  inspected  by  the  visitors,  and  not  left  to  the  mercies  of  ultra-Pro- 
testants, as  in  1547-8.  The  Ronian  Offices  were,  of  course,  removed  Hut  the 
"  Injumtion  "  is  no  nore  to  the  disparagement  of  the  copes  and  other  vestments 
than  of  the  Church  plate. 


And  about 

•wa-ier 

bread. 


302  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

so  without  "riot  or  disorder."  And  they  were  to  pro- 
vide "  that  the  table  be  decently  made,  and  set  in  the 
place  ivliere  the  altar  stood;  and  so  to  stand  but  when 
the  Communion  should  be  celebrated.  And  then  it 
shall  be  so  placed  within  the  chancel  as  the  minister 
may  more  conveniently  be  heard  of  the  communicants, 
and  the  communicants  in  more  conveniency  arid  number 
communicate  with  the  minister."^  The  order  for  the 
bread  also  shows  us  the  direction  of  her  Majesty's 
sympathies.  "  For  the  giving  the  more  reverence  to 
the  holy  mysteries,"  such  "  common  fine  bread  "  as  was 
used  for  sacrament-il  bread  under  Edward  VI.  is  dis- 
allowed. The  bread  is  to  be  "  of  the  same  fineness  and 
round  fashion,  but  somewhat  bigger,  as  was  the  usual 
bread  or  wafer  heretofore  named  singing  cakes,  which 
served  for  the  use  of  the  piivate  mass."  But  it  is  to  be 
"plain,  without  any  figure  impiessed  upon  it." 

We  must  now  direct  the  student's  attention  to  the 
a  primate,  j^g^  episoopal  appointments.  Parker's  retiring  dis- 
position had  led  him  to  decline  the  primacy  when 
Bacon  fir.«^t  communicated  with  him  on  the  subject. 
The  queen's  choice  had  next  fallen  on  Sir  Nicholas 
Wotton,  Dean  of  Canterbury  under  Mary.  Wotton, 
like  Cardinal  Pole,  was  a  Catholic  with  Reforming  pro- 
clivities. He  was  conspicuous  rather  as  a  diplomatist 
than  a  divine,  and  had  been  in  the  Privy  Council 
under  Edward  and  Mar}^  That  he  declined  the  offer  is 
probably  to  be  set  down  to  his  consciousness  of  a  lack 
of  theological  attainments.  That  the  offer  was  made 
will  convince  the  reader  that  the  hard  and  fast  line  of 
doctrinal  severance  which  in  later  times  distinguished 
papist  from  Anglican  was  at  this  date  unknown.  The 
queen's  next  choice  is  no  less  instructive.     Feckenhara. 

'■  See  Cardwell,  Annals,  vol.  i.  p.  201. 


Choice  of 


ELIZABETH.  303 

Abbot  of  Westminster,  had  been  chaplain  to  the  Bishop      chap. 
of  London,  the  "Bloody  Bonner"  of  Foxe.     He  was,     —J— 
however,    of   mild   and   tolerant   disposition,    and   the 
queen  probably  thought  he  would  be  a  fit  exponent 
of  her  own  conciliatory  policy.     Feckenham,  however, 
felt  himself  unable  to  renounce  the  papal  supremacy.-^ 

Matthew  Parker  was  again  pressed,  and  the  matter  was 
decided  before  the  middle  of  May.  The  conge,  d'elire 
was  issued  on  May  18,  accompanied  probably  by  a 
letter  missive  nominating  Dr.  Parker.  He  was  elected 
by  the  dean  and  chapter  on  August  1. 

In  the  first  commission  for  his  consecration  three  Matthew 
of  the  malcontent  bishops  were  included — Tonstal,  c^nSjra- 
Bourne,  and  Poole.  They  refused  to  act.  A  second  ^'°'^" 
commission  was  issued,  to  seven  bishops  of  Reforming 
principles.  Three  are  sufficient,  according  to  Catholic 
usage,  to  give  canonical  consecration.  A  state  enact- 
ment of  Henry's  reign  ^  required  four,  when  the  metro- 
politan was  not  one  of  the  officiating  bishops.  The 
warrant  therefore  required  that  "  at  least  four  "  of  the 
seven  should  officiate.  The  four  whom  the  archbishop- 
elect  deputed  to  this  business  were  all  of  them  men 
Avho  had  been  raised  to  the  episcopate  in  the  reign  of 
Henry.  Their  names  were  Bailow,  formerly  Bishop 
of  Bath  and  Wells,  and  now  elect  of  Chichester; 
Hodgkins,  Bishop-suffragan  of  Bedford;  Coverdale, 
formerly  Bishop  of  Exeter ;  and  Scory,  formerly  Bishop 

'  See  Wood's  Athenaj,  i.  500.  Hook  remarks  that  "  it  is  so  unlikely  the  Puritans 
would  have  tolerated  such  an  archbishop  that  we  should  probably  be  correct  in 
saying  that  he  was  only  '  talked  of  for  the  primacy.' "  The  subsequent  career 
of  the  last  Abbot  of  Westminster  was  unfortunate.  Having  refused  the  oath  of 
supremacy,  he  was  housed  with  Home,  Bishop  of  Winchester,  with  the  usual 
restrictions  on  his  liberty.  Being  unable  to  live  peacefully  with  this  somewhat 
narrow-minded  prelate,  he  was  transferred  to  the  custody  of  the  Bishop  of  London. 
In  the  disturbances  stirred  up  by  the  emissaries  of  Pius  V.  be  fell  under  suspicio  i, 
and  was  confined  in  Wisbech  Castle. 

=  Stat.  25  Henry  VIII.  cap.  20. 


304 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


Head 
Fable. 


of  Eocliester,  and  now  elect  of  Hereford.  That  all  four 
were  canonically  consecrated  is  admitted  by  all  honest 
Eomanist  historians.  The  consecration  of  Dr.  Parker 
took  place  in  the  chapel  at  Lambeth  on  December  17, 
1559.  The  formulary  used  was  the  second  ordinal  of 
Edward  VI.,  which  had  been  legalized  by  the  recent 
"Act  of  Uniformity."  The  ceremony  is  described  in 
detail  in  contemporaneous  accounts  surviving  in  the 
Lambeth  register  and  the  manuscripts  of  Corpus 
The  "Nag's  Christi,  Cambridge.  In  1603,  when  the  hostility  of 
Eomanist  and  Anglican  reached  its  acme  of  bitterness, 
one  Christopher  Holywood  circulated  a  clumsy  fiction, 
intended  to  make  men  believe  that  the  proceedings  on 
this  occasion  were  informal  and  irreverent.  The  story 
is  known  as  the  "  Nag's  Head  Fable."  It  pretends 
that  Scory  assembled  Parker  and  all  the  other  newly 
elected  bishops  at  a  tavern  in  Fleet  Street,  and  there 
made  them  members  of  the  episcopate  by  laying  a  Bible 
on  their  heads.  The  tale,  though  proved  false  by  Lord 
Nottingham,  an  eye-witness  of  the  consecration  in 
Lambeth  Chapel,  was  eagerly  accepted  in  certain 
quarters  as  the  only  means  of  assailing  the  validity  of 
Anglican  Orders  and  the  catholicity  of  our  Church. 
It  will  suffice  to  say  that  it  has  been  given  up  as  a 
clumsy  falsehood  by  such  writers  as  Lingard, 
Tierney,  and  Charles  Butler,  and  only  deserves  atten- 
tion as  showing  to  what  shifts  the  assailants  of  our 
Church  have  been  driven.^  Eeturning  to  matters  of 
fact,  we  notice  that  no  new  bishops  were  consecrated 
on  the  same  day  as  Parker.  A  few  days  after  his  own 
consecration,  however,  Parker  assisted  at  the  consecra- 
tion of  Giindal,  Bishop  of  London ;    Cox,    Bishop   of 


other 
episcopal 
appoint- 
ments 


'   A  good  reanwe  of  tlie  argiiments  hy  which  tliis  myth  is  unmasked  may  be 
found  in  Perry's  Student's  English  Church  History,  p.  2.sa. 


ELIZABETH.  305 

Ely ;  Sandj's,  BIsliop  of  Worcester  ;  and  Merrick,  Bishop      chap. 
of  Bangor.     In  January  five  more  were  consecrated —     .   ^,^'    . 
Young  to  S.  David's,  Bullingliam  to  Lincoln,  Jewel  to 
Salisbury,  Davis  to  S.  Asaph,  and  Guest  to  Rochester. 

The  stratagem  of  disarming  a  possible  leader  of  Tiie  Low- 
faction  by  promotion  to  office  sometimes  receives  illus-  element, 
tration  in  our  own  times.  It  was  to  this  principle  of 
policy  that  many  of  the  Elizabethan  bishops  owed 
their  preferment.  Puritanism  of  a  mild  type  found  its 
way  to  the  Episcopal  bench :  it  soon  had  its  repre- 
sentatives in  the  Lower  House  of  Convocation.  It  was 
only  by  the  firmness  of  the  primate  and  the  queen  that 
this  party  was  kept  in  restraint.  Great  at  first  were 
the  lamentations  of  Sandys  and  the  other  commissioners 
who  had  destroyed  roods  and  images,  at  having  to 
officiate  in  the  queen's  chapel  at  an  altar  bedecked  with 
lights  and  crucifix,  clad  in  "popisli  vestments."^  The 
queen  replied  with  an  unfeeling  threat  to  restore  all 
the  roods  to  parish  churches.  In  view  of  such  a  fearful 
prospect  the  aggrieved  bishops  thought  it  better  to 
hold  their  peace. 

On  January  22,   1560,  a  commission  was  issued  to  The  New- 
Parker,  Grindal,  Bill,  and  Haddon,  to  provide  a  Lee-  and 
tionary,  or  Table  of  Lessons.     For  this  work  Parker  ajj.  isei. 
was  already  paving  the  way  by  a  revision  of  the  Calen- 
dar.    The  number  of  holy  days  before  the  Eeformation 
had  been  excessive,  and  it  was  generally  felt  that  their 
observance   fostered    idleness   rather  than  piety.     The 
Edwardian  Reformers  had  effected  a  somewhat  precipi- 
tate expurgation  of  the  Calendar.      The  Calendar  of 
1549   retained  only  what  are  called  red-letter  days — 
those   for   which   Collects,   Epistles,   and   Gospels   are 
appointed.     Among  these  was  included  S.  Mary  Mag- 

'  See  the  Zurich  Letters,  i.  63,  66,  67. 


3o6  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

dalene's  Da3^  In  1552  S.  George,  S.  Lawrence,  and 
S.  Clement  were  added  as  black-letter  days  to  the 
Calendar,  and  (perhaps  by  mistake)  the  name  of 
S.  Mary  Magdalene  was  altogether  omitted.  In  Parker's 
Calendar,  which  was  published  in  1561  by  the  authority 
of  the  commissioners,  the  red-letter  days  remained  the 
same  as  in  1552;  a  few  black-letter  days  were,  how- 
ever, allotted  to  each  month.  Amongst  these  appears 
S.  Mary  Magdalene's  Day.  Yery  little  alteration  was 
made  in  this  Calendar  at  the  revision  of  1662.  The 
Lectionary  of  1561  has  also  remained  almost  unaltered 
till  the  present  reign.  It  is  noticeable  that  the  admo- 
nition which  precedes  the  "  Second  Book  of  Homilies," 
appears  to  give  the  clergyman  licence  to  substitute 
another  lesson  at  his  own  discretion  when  the  ap- 
pointed passage  is  considered  unedifjdng.-^  These  two 
publications  had  no  synodical  sanction.  Discussion  on 
the  matter  of  the  Calendar  would  probably  have  raised 
a  storm  among  the  Puritans.  Parker  avoided  the 
danger  by  stretching  his  own  authority  as  jDrimate, 
and  the  powers  of  the  newly  devised  ecclesiastical 
commission.  His  action  is  excusable,  but  it  estab- 
lished a  dangerous  precedent. 
Scarcity  of  The  plagu8  whicli  had  proved  so  fatal  to  the  bishops 
had  thinned  the  ranks  of  the  clergy.  The  diocesans 
found  it  no  easy  matter  to  fill  the  impoverished  livings 
Avith  men  of  learning  and  social  status.  Some  of  the 
new  bishops  thought  that  in  such  an  emergency  these 
qualifications  might  be  disregarded,  and  did  not  scruple 
to  confer  Holy  Orders  on  mechanics  or  "  artificers  "  of 
godly  life.  Archbishop  Parker  writes  in  August,  1560, 
to  Grindal,  complaining  of  this  degradation  of  the  holy 
oftice.     "  Now,"  he  sa^^s,  "  by  experience  it  is  seen  that 

'  See  Cardwell,  Annals,  i.  p.  201,  note. 


ELIZABETH.  307 

such  manner  of  men,  partly  by  reason  of  their  former      cmap. 
profane  arts,  partly  by  their  light  behaviour  otherwise     -J^!l_. 
and  trade  of  life,  are  very  offensive  unto  the  people  • 
yea,  and  to  the  wise  of  this  realm  are  thought  to  do 
great   deal   more   hurt    than  good,    the    Gospel    there 
sustaining   slander."  •■■      The    archbishop    adopted   the  x,ay helpers 
wiser  plan  of  supplementing  the  clerical  force  by  a  con-  ^^^°^^^^^- 
tingent  of  lay  helpers,  who  were  permitted  to  say  the 
Litany  and  read  the  Homilies  in  the  destitute  churches, 
but  not,  of  course,  to  trespass  on  those  functions  that  are 
strictly  clerical.     The  lamentable  effects  of  the  queen's 
extortions,  however,    were   long   observable   in    every 
diocese.      The   answers   to   Parker's   circular   of   1561 
levealed    a    fearful    deficiency   of    suitable    ministers. 
From  the  diocese  of  Norwich  more  than  four  hundred 
benefices  are  reported  as  without  incumbents.    In  1563, 
of  one  hundred  and  eighteen  clergy  in  the  archdeaconry 
of  Middlesex,  only  three  are  reported  as  "  Docti  Latino 
et  Gra3ce  ;  "  forty-three  come  under  the  heading  "  Latine 
parum  aliquid."  ^     It  may  be  presumed  that  the  country 
clergy  were  not  superior  to  their  London  brethren. 

In  1562  a  great  sensation  was  caused  by  the  appear-  Jewers 
ance  of  Bishop  Jewel's  "  Apology,"  a  book  which  still  a^d.°i56s'" 
ranks  among  the  classical  literature  of  Anglicanism. 
The  writer's  personal  history  had  hardly  been  such  as 
to  augur  any  achievement  requiring  fixed  religious 
principles.  In  Mary's  reign  Jewel  had,  under  intimida- 
tion, recanted  all  that  could  offend  the  inquisitors  ;  he 
repented  and  fled  abroad,  to  become,  like  many  other 
refugees,  infected  with  a  Pnritaniym  which  was  after- 
wards  discarded.      He  appears   to   have   reached   his 

'  Parker's  Correspondence,  p.  120. 

'  This  is  in  a  catalogue  of  the  year  1563,  cited  by  Gibson  in  a  letter  to  Pepys: 
Bee  Short's  History  of  the  Church  of  England,  vol.  i,  p.  355. 


3o8  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

CHAP,  unassailable  theological  position  as  early  as  June  18, 
_^tl:_  1559,  when,  in  a  sermon  at  Paul's  Cross,  he  declared 
the  true  Anglican  principle— divergence  from  Eome 
only  where  Eome  is  mediaeval  and  not  primitive.  In 
this  sermon  he  challenges  proof  "  by  the  Scriptures,  or 
by  the  example  of  the  primitive  Church,  or  by  the  old 
doctors,  or  by  the  eminent  General  Councils,"  of  some 
twenty-eight  mediseval  tenets,  and  in  the  ensuing 
controversy  he  was  in  the  main  successful.  The 
"  Apology  "  undertakes  the  safer  task  of  disproving  such 
Eomanist  allegations  as  that  the  Anglican  body  "  had. 
rebelliously  withdrawn  from  the  Catholic  Church ; " 
that  "  as  for  the  authority  of  the  ancient  Fathers  and 
old  Councils,  we  set  them  at  nought :  "  "  that  all  ancient 
ceremonies,  such  as  by  our  grandfathers  and  gieat- 
grandfathers,  now  many  ages  past,  .  .  .  were  approved, 
we  had  rashly  and  arrogantly  abolished."  This  defence 
of  the  catholicity  of  our  Church  was  soon  translated 
into  almost  all  the  languages  of  Europe.  Harding  of 
Louvain  attempted  to  answer  it,  taking  as  his  basis  the 
principle  which  the  Council  of  Constance  had  disowned — 
that  the  Bishop  of  Eome  is  infallible.  Jewel  retorted 
with  a  "  Defence  of  the  '  Apolog}^'  "  in  1569. 
The  As  early  as  1562  the  "  Bishops'  Bible  "  was  in  project, 

ibie.°^^  if  not  actually  begun.  The  last  translation  effected 
in  England  was  that  revision  of  the  work  of  Eogers 
and  Coverdale  which  had  been  issued  with  a  preface  b}'" 
Cranmer  in  1540,  and  which  was  commonly  called  the 
"  Great  Bible."  During  the  Marian  persecution  the 
English  refugees  at  Geneva,  Mdfh  the  assistance  of 
foreign  divines,  had  bronght  out  the  "  Geneva  Bible."  ^ 
This  work,  which  was  superior  to  its  predecessors  as 

'  Whittingham,  "who  had   married  Calvin's  sifter,  translated  the  whole  of  the 
New  Testament,  the  most  creditable  part  of  tl;e  publication. 


Bible 
A.D.  1568 


ELIZABETH.  309 

a  translation,  was  marred  by  a  commentary  of  an  ultra-  chap 
Protestant  and  levelling  tone,  wherein  the  sacred  text  — ^ 
was  wrested  to  gratify  the  animus  of  party.  Parker 
hoped  to  prepare  a  translation  more  worthy  to  be  the 
authorized  version  of  the  English  Church.  Fourteen 
translators  were  appointed.  The  fact  that  most  of 
them  were  bishops  gave  their  production  the  name 
the  "  Bishops'  Bible."  ^  The  new  version  came  out  in 
1568.  The  rule  had  been  that  the  translators  should 
"make  no  use  of  bitter  notes  of  any  kind,"  nor  "set 
down  any  determination  in  places  of  controversy." 
This  was  an  improvement.  The  translation  itself, 
however,  was  inaccurate,  and  the  arrangement  of  the 
work  was  unsystematic  and  slovenly.  The  translators 
did  not  act  in  concert,  and  the  time  allowed  them 
was  probably  insufficient.  So  far  the  "  Bishops'  Bible  " 
deserved  the  hatred  with  which  the  Puritans  always 
regarded  it.  Leicester,  their  patron,  prevented  its  re- 
ceiving royal  sanction.  Archbishop  Grindal,  Parker's 
successor,  appears  to  have  looked  with  favour  on  the 
Genevan  version.  The  "Bishops'  Bible"  was  not 
authorized^  till  1004,  when  about  to  be  superseded 
by  the  version  now  in  use. 

Measures  of  great  importance  were  passed  in  the 
Convocation  which  met  on  January  29,  1563.  The  Pre- 
cisians obtained,  probably  through  the  manoeuvring 
of  some  of  the  bishops,  a  strung  footing  in  this 
Convocation.  It  had  seemed  advisable  to  Parker 
that  a  code  of  Articles  should  be  published,  laying 
down  fixed  limits  for  pulpit  teaching.  Eleven  Articles 
had  been  already  compiled  to  serve  this  purpose.     It 

*  Parker  himself  translated  Genesis,  Exodus,  tbe  two  first  Gospels,  and  all  the 
Epistles  of  S.  Paul  except  Romans  and  Corinthians.  lie  is  also  credited  with  the 
Prefaces  to  the  Psalter,  to  the  New  restament,  and  to  the  whole  Bible. 

-  See  Canon  LXXX.  of  that  year. 


3IO  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

was  now  proposed  to  secure  the  sanction  of  Convocation 
for  a  revised  edition  of  Cranmer's  Forty-two  Articles. 
Revision  of  In  preparing  this  edition  Parker  was  assisted  by  Cox, 
Forty-two    Bishop  of  Ely ;  Guest,  Bishop  of  Eochester ;  and  Grindal, 
Bishop  of  London.     The  Articles  in  the  course  of  this 
revision  were  reduced  to  their  present  number,  thirty- 
nine.     We  have  already  noticed  the  changes  made  at 
this  time,  few  of  which  are  of  much  doctrinal  impor- 
tance.    We   have   also  pointed  out  that  the   Articles 
were  not  intended  as  a  confession  of  faith,  but  only  as 
Opposed      a  barrier  to  pulpit  extravaoiance.     The  Puritan  extreme 

by  the  .  " 

Puritans  in  was  the   ono  addictcd  to   doctrinal  vagaries,   and   its 
tion^°'^^       representatives  in  this  Convocation  regarded  the   en- 
A.D.  1563.   forcement  of  the  Articles  as  a  grievous  outrage.     The 
prelates  of  both  provinces  passed  them   unanimously. 
But  the  Lower  House  of  Canterbury  reported  that  a 
minority  therein  refused  to  sign.    It  is  not  clear  whether 
the  malcontents   submitted  on  this  occasion ;  in  1571, 
when  the  Articles  received  a  few  finishing  touches  at 
the  hands  of  Bishop  Jewel,  every  member  of  Convo- 
cation had   to  subscribe,  under  penalty  of  expulsion. 
The  Articles  were  laid  before  the  queen  for  ratification. 
She  appears  to  have  disliked  all  such  formularies,  as 
tending  to  narrow  the  confines  of  the  Church.     She 
detained   them   nearly  a  year   before   she   authorized 
The  queen    them.     When  they  came  back  they  had  undersfone  two 

alters  the       .  t/  o 

Articles.  important  alterations.  At  the  beginning  of  the 
twentieth  Article  appeared  for  the  first  time  the  clause 
"  Habet  ecclesia  ritus  ^  statuendi  jus,  et  in  fidei  contro- 
versiis  auctoritatera."  The  twenty-ninth  Article  (that 
which  declares  that  the  wicked  do  not  really  participate 
in  the  Lord's  Supper)  was  omitted.  It  was  doubtless 
by  the  queen's  directions  that  these  changes  had  been 

'  The  original  clause  does  not  contain  the  words  slve  crremonias. 


.ELIZABETH.  311 

made.^     There  were  thus  two  distinct  recensions  of  the      crap. 
Articles.     The  English  version  of  the  Articles,  printed        ^^-   . 
by  Jugg  and  Cawood  at  this  time,  was  a  third  variant. 
This  omitted  the  clause  in  the  twentieth  Article,  but 
also   omitted  Article   XXIX.     The  copy  accepted   by  The 
Convocation  in  1571  includes  both  the  dis^^uted  para-  clauses 
graphs.     But  it  appears  that  the  Act  of  Parliament  f^  ilyi^ 
which  enforced  clerical  subscription,  refers  not  to  this 
copy,  but  to  an  English  translation   of  the  Convoca- 
tional  copy  of  1563.     Thus  the  opening  clause  of  the 
twentieth  Article  did  not  receive  parliamentary  recog- 
nition.     Laud   was   afterwards    unjustly   attacked  by 
the  Puritans  as  the  author  of  this  controverted  clause. 
The   doctrinal  importance  of  the  variation    has   been 
overestimated.     Were  the  clause  in  Article  XX.  struck 
out,  the  same  truth  would  remain  embodied  in  Article 
XXXIV.    The  Articles  of  1563  sanctioned  the  "  Second  me 
Book  of  Homilies"  as  containing  "  a  godly  and  whole-  Book  of 
some  doctrine,  and  necessary  for  these  times."     This  ^omiues. 
work  had  been  previously  accepted  by  Convocation.     It 
appears  that  it  had  always  been  intended  that  the  "  Book 
of  Homilies"  of   1547   should  be  enlarged.      Cranmer 
himself  gives  a  promise  of  more  Homilies  at  the  end  of 
the  book,  and  in  October,  1552,  we  find  King  Edward 
setting  down    "  the  making  of  more  Homilies "   in  a 
memorandum  of  "matters  to  be  considered."     Clergy 
capable   of  composing    sermons  were  now  scarce;   the 
demand  for  more  Homilies  was  therefore  urg-ent.     The 
twenty-one   discourses  which  were  sanctioned  by  the 
Convocation  of  1563  as  the  "  Second  Book  of  Homilies  " 
were  probably  mainly  composed  or  compiled  by  Parker 

'  Bishop  Browne  remarks,  however,  that  "  the  clause  itself  was  taken  from  the 
Lutheran  Confession  of  Wiirtemberg,  from  which  source  Archbishop  Parker 
derived  most  of  the  additions  which  were  made  in  Queen  Elizabeth's  reign  to  the 
Articles  drawn  up  by  Cranmer." — Exposition  of  the  XXXIX.  Articles,  p.  469. 


31  i 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


CHAP,  and  Jev/el.  The  Puritanical  discourse,  "Against  peril 
_^i__  of  idolatry  "  (Homily  II.),  is  noticeable  as  a  concession 
to  the  rising  faction.  It  is  based  upon  an  earlier  pro- 
duction which  Foxe  publishes  as  a  "  treatise  of  Master 
Nicholas  Eidley,  in  the  name,  as  it  seemeth,  of  the  whole 
clergy."  That  Eidley  had  anything  to  do  with  it  is 
uncertain.  It  is  clearly  taken  from  Bullinger's  treatise, 
"De  0^'igine  Erroris,  etc."  The  other  Homilies  appear 
unexceptionable.  From  royalty  the  Homilies  received 
as  tardy  a  recognition  as  the  Articles.  Elizabeth  de- 
tained the  book  for  a  whole  year  before  she  gave  it 
ratification.  Homily  XXII.,  "  Against  rebellion,"  was 
not  written  till  1570.  It  was  occasioned  by  the  rising 
in  the  north  in  the  autumn  of  1569.  It  was  added  to 
the  Homilies  by  the  Convocation  of  1571. 

A  Catechism  of  a  Puritanical  tendency,  based  upon 
the  production  of  Bishop  Poynet,  had  been  composed 
by  Dean  Nowell,  now  the  prolocutor  of  the  Lower 
House.  He  was  extremely  anxious  to  inflict  it  on  the 
Church  as  an  authoritative  formula,  and  had  vainly 
tried  to  get  Cecil  to  countenance  this  narrowing  scheme. 
In  the  present  session  of  Convocation  the  Catechism 
was  supported  by  the  Puritan  representatives,  thirty- 
three  in  number,  but  failed  to  secure  the  approval  of 
the  House.  In  1570  it  was  accepted  by  the  Low^er 
House,  but  did  not  pass  the  Upper.^  It  appears  to 
have  been  a  favourite  contention  with  the  men  of  this 
party  that  Nowell's  Catechism  had  received  synodical 
sanction. 
ThePuri-  The  thirty-thrce  also  presented  a  scheme  of  seven 

tan  mani-        Ai'iini  •  •  "ii 

festo  in  Con-  Articlcs,  levelled  against  certain  customs  retained  by  our 
Church.  The  scheme  demanded  that  several  saints' 
days  should  be  abolished ;  that  the  sign  of  the  cross 

*  Synodus  AngUcana,  215. 


ELIZABETH. 


j^j 


in  Baptism  sliould  be  disused,  as  tending  to  superstition  ;  chap. 
that  "  forasmuch  as  divers  communicants  are  not  able  _^i_ 
to  kneel  durins:  the  time  of  Communion  .  .  .  and  some 
also  both  superstitiously  kneel  and  knock,  that  order 
of  kneeling  may  be  left  to  the  ordinary  ;  "  that  organs 
should  be  silen-ced ;  that  the  surplice  should  be  the 
only  dress  of  the  minister  in  church ;  and  that  out  of 
church  the  clergy  should  not  wear  "  caps  and  gowns 
such  as  were  customary  among  the  Eoman  priesthood."  ^ 
This  extraordinary  manifesto  is  to  be  ascribed  almost 
entirely  to  the  influence  of  the  Low  Church  bishops 
and  the  Puritan  court  faction.  Of  the  proctors  repre- 
senting the  parochial  clergy,  only  fourteen  signed  it. 
The  remaining  nineteen  names  are  those  of  dignitaries 
— thirteen  archdeacons,  a  pro-vost,  and  five  deans.  A 
scheme  of  more  insidious  character  was  introduced  in 
the  Upper  House  by  Bishop  Sandys.  He  proposed  to 
hand  over  the  discipline  and  government  of  the  Church 
to  a  committee  appointed  by  the  queen  and  working 
under  the  control  of  Parliament.  This  was  just  what 
such  courtiers  as  Leicester  desired.  It  is  creditable  to 
the  Upper  House  that  Sand}V  scheme  had  not  a  single 
supporter. 

We  have  already  observed   that  Elizabeth  was  ex-  ^he  queen-s 
tremely  averse  to  the  system  of  irreverent  Puritanism  ^^^^ 
which  was  now  infusing  itself  into  the  Church.     We  support  of 
find  that   she  was  wont  at  this   time  to  address  the 
bishops  on  the  subject  in  petulant  and  captious  tones. 
Neverth-eless,  she  would  give  Parker  no  assistance  in 
his   attempts  to   introduce   a   higher   standard.      This  Leicester's 
demeanour  is  partly  attributable  to  policy ;  but  the  in- 
consistency  is   mainly   due   to   the   extraordinary  in- 
fluence of  her  favourite  Leicester.     Despite  his  detest- 

'  See  Pryce,  England's  Sacred  Synods,  pp.  5C4,  565. 


314  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

able  character,  this  person  posed  as  the  champion  of 
the  Precisians.  To  the  salutary  measures  devised  by 
Parker  and  Cecil  Earl  of  Burleigh,  for  maintaining 
Church  discipline,  he  offered  a  violent  opposition.  The 
queen  was  too  frequently  induced  to  side  with  this 
unworthy  favourite  rather  than  with  the  well-wishers 
of  the  Church.  Encouraged  by  this  support,  the  ultra- 
Protestant  faction  assumed  a  menacing  demeanour. 
Dissenters   The  benefices  of  the  Church  were  beino;  filled  by  men 

take  Orders       t  t       ^      •  o  ,/ 

in  the  who   had   imbibed   the  spirit   of   the   Calvinistic   and 

Zudnglian  systems,   and  whose  views  with  regard   to 

sacraments  and  means  of  grace  were  utterly  at  variance 

with   the   teaching    of    the   English    Church.      These 

persons  were  advised  by  their  continental  friends  to 

feign   acceptance   of    the    doctrines   embodied   in   the 

Prayer-book,  with   the   view  of  ultimately   decatholi- 

cizing  the  Church.     Thek  real  sympathies  were  rather 

with   the   horde   of  "  Anabaptists,   Arians,   libertines, 

Free-will   men,    etc.,"   whose   influx    into  England   is 

deplored  dn  Parker's  letters.     Sometimes,  as  in  the  case 

of    Dean    Turner,  the   Puritan   mind  expressed   itself 

in   open   ridicule  of  those  tenets  and  practices  which 

distinguished  Anglicanism  from  the   sects.       Tolerant 

though  Parker  was,  he  was  not  the  man  to  fawn  on  the 

royal  favourite,  or  quail  before  the  clamour  of  faction. 

Cranmer,  under  similar  circumstances,  had  collapsed. 

Parker,  to  his  lasting  honour,  maintained  the  principles 

of  Anglicanism,  despite  the  "  civium  ardor  prava  juben- 

Their  tium  "  and  the  "  vultus  in&tantis  tyranni."     We  have 

in  ritual       obscrvcd  elscwhcre  that  deep  principles  have  been  often 

Parker  a      involved   in  vestiarian   or   ritualistic   controversies   of 

ground^"      sccming  insignificance.    The  differences  between  Anglo- 

Catholic  and  Puritan  were  on  this  occasion  compressed 

within   these  narrow  confines.     The   Puritans   of  set 


ELIZABETH.  3^5 

purpose  conducted  divine  service  with  slovenly  irre-  chap. 
verence.  Some  would  not  kneel  at  Holy  Communion  ;  .  ^J-  _ 
many  would  not  even  wear  the  surplice.  The  queen, 
roused  to  anger,  admonished  Parker  that  "  there  was 
crept  and  brought  into  the  Church  by  some  few  per- 
sons abounding  more  in  their  own  sense  than  wisdom, 
and  delighting  in  singularities  and  changes,  an  open 
and  manifest  disorder  and  offence,  specially  in  the 
external  and  decent  and  lawful  rites  and  ceremonies  to 
be  used  in  the  Church."  He  was  ordered  to  confer 
with  the  other  ecclesiastical  commissioners  and  the 
ordinaries,  and  to  proceed  by  order,  injunction,  or 
censure,  so  that  uniformity  might  be  established.    Thus  Theaueen 

.  evades  the 

much  and  no  more  would  the  queen  do  for  her  religion,  respon- 
Policy  and  the  personal  influence  of  Leicester  shifted 
the  responsibility  of  all  future  proceedings  on  the 
archbishop's  shoulders.  Parker  drew  up  Articles,  but 
had  to  complain,  "if  the  queen's  majesty  will  not 
authorize  them,  the  most  part  be  likely  to  lie  in  the 
dust  for  execution."  It  appears  that  at  last  he  decided 
that  his  powers  as  primate  were  sufficient  to  warrant 
the  issue  of  a  code  of  rules  which  should  secure  "  de- 
cency, distinction,  and  order  for  the  time."  A  book  of  Parker's 
"Advertisements"  was  accordingly  drawn  up,  contain-  ments." 
ing  articles  ranged  under  four  heads :  for  doctrine  and 
preaching ;  for  administration  of  prayer  and  sacraments  ; 
for  certain  orders  in  ecclesiastical  policy ;  and  for  out- 
ward apparel  of  persons  ecclesiastical.  This  work  was 
probably  published  early  in  1565,  but  not  generally 
circulated  till  March,  1566,  when  Parker  sent  it  to 
Cecil  for  perusal.  In  his  letter  he  remarks,  "  When  the 
queen's  highness  will  needs  have  me  assay  with  mine 
own  authority  what  I  can  do  for  order,  I  trust  I  shall  not 
be   stayed  hereafter."  ^      Though   originally  intended 

'  Parker  Correspondence,  p.  272. 


ii6 


ECCLESIA    ANGLICANA. 


CHAT. 
XI. 


Not  sanc- 
tioned by 
the  queen. 


only  as  a  temporary  remedy,  the  "Advertisements" 
assumed  a  less  questionable  status  in  the  next  reign, 
when  they  were  recognized  as  authoritative  by  Canot;. 
XXIV.,  which  was  ratified  by  the  king.  There  is  no 
reason  to  believe  that  they  recei-ved  royal  sanction  in 
the  present  reign.  It  need  scarcely  be  said,  therefore, 
that  it  was  never  imagined  at  this  period  that  Parker's 
"Advertisements"  were  a  "taking  of  further  order" 
on  the  part  of  the  queen,  with  respect  to  the  ornaments 
prescribed  by  the  rubric.  Still  less  possible  is  it  to 
suppose  that  any  limitation  of  the  orn-aments  sanctioned 
by  the  rubric  was  aimed  at  in  the  "Advertisements." 
Parker's  publication  was  clearly  intended  only  as  a 
bye-law,  giving  practical  shape  to  a  statute  hitherto 
inoperative.  To  force  the  Puritan  clergy  to  adopt  the 
ornaments  of  1548,  according  to  the  strict  letter  of  the 
rubric,  was  impossible.  Parker  wisely  drew  the  line 
■  at  the  surplice  and  the  fair  linen  cloth  for  the  altar. 
Thus  much  he  insisted  on.  To  argue  from  this  that  he 
prohibited  more,  in  defiance  of  the  unrepealed  rubric, 
is  to  pervert  all  that  is  known  of  the  man,  the  measure, 
and  the  times.^ 

'  It  will  be  borne  in  mind  that  the  vestment  controversies  of  our  own  day  have 
given  the  "  Advertisements  "  of  Archbishop  Parker  a  somewhat  spurious  import- 
ance. The  "  Act  of  Uniformity  "  had  enjoined  the  use  of  such  vestments  as  had 
sanction  in  1548,  "until  the  queen  should  take  further  order."  The  chasuble,  alb, 
and  tunicle  were  therefore  at  this  time  the  legal  dress  of  the  celebrant,  although 
there  is  reason  to  believe  that  these  vestments  were  seldom  worn.  Parker's 
"Advertisements,"  however,  make  no  mention  of  any  other  dress  besides  the 
surplice  as  necessary  "  at  the  ministration  of  the  Sacrament  in  the  ordinary  parish 
churches."  Nobody  who  knows  under  what  circumstances  the  "Advertisements  " 
were  published  can  doubt  that  the  surplice  is  thus  specified  in  view  of  Puritan 
slovenliness,  as  the  minimum  that  would  be  tolerated  in  the  way  of  "apparel  for 
all  persons  ecclesiastical."  In  modern  times,  however,  under  the  pressure  of 
influences  which  need  not  be  particularized,  it  has  been  ruled  that  "omission  is  to  be 
considered  as  prohibition  ;  "  and  that  tLie  "  Advertisements,"  which  never  received 
the  formal  sanction  of  the  Crown,  and  did  not  introduce  any  modification  in  our 
Prayer-book's  rubrics,  were  in  reality  a  "taking  of  further  order"  on  the  part  of 
the  queen,  who,  in  point  of  fact,  took  pains  to  disown  them  in  1576.  By  this 
manipulation  of  history  the  conclusion  is  arrived  at  that  the  Eucharistic  vestments 


ELIZABETH,  317 

We   notice   the   most  interesting  directions   in   the      chap. 
"  Advertisements  "  tinder  the  four  heads  given  above : —     .  ^]' 

lExcGnots 

I.  Clergy  are  to  excite  the  people  to  frequent  communion  :  from  the 
cleroiv  who  preach  on  matters  tendino;  to  dissension  or  "  dero-  "-A-dvertise- 

nj  1  o  ments. 

gation  of  the  religion  and  doctrine  received  "  ought  to  be  re- 
ported to  the  bishop  or  ordinary.  II.  Common  prayer  is  to  be 
said  in  such  part  of  the  church  ^  "  as  the  ordinary  shall  think 
meet  for  the  largeness  and  straightness  of  the  church  ...  so 
that  the  people  may  be  most  edified."  In  cathedrals  and 
colleges  Holy  Communion  is  to  be  celebrated  at  least  once  a 
month  :  the  celebrant  to  use  a  cope  "  with  gospeller  and  epistoller 
agreeably."  At  other  services  the  surplice  is  to  be  worn.  "  And 
any  minister  saying  any  public  prayers  or  ministering  the 
sacraments  shall  wear  a  comely  surplice  with  sleeves,  to  be  . 
provided  at  the  charge  of  the  parish."  The  Communion  Table 
is  to  be  decently  covered  with  carpet,  silk,  etc.,  and  at  time  of 
celebration,  with  a  fair  linen  cloth.  All  communicants  are  to 
receive  kneeling.  Basins  are  not  to  be  used  at  baptism  in  lieu 
of  the  font.  The  bell  is  to  be  tolled  for  every  "  Christian  body  " 
who  "  is  in  passing.  .  .  .  After  the  time  of  his  passing  "  only 
one  short  peal  is  to  be  rung.  AY  hen  fairs  or  markets  fall  on  a 
Sunday  there  is  to  be  no  showing  of  wares  till  service  be  done. 
III.  Archdeacons  are  to  "  appoint  the  cnrates  to  certain  taxes 
of  the  New  Testament,  to  be  conned  without  book."  Church- 
wardens are  to  report  to  the  ordinary  those  "  which  will  not 
readily  pay  their  penalties  for  not  coming  to  God^s  service."  No 
person  is  to  marry  within  the  degrees  set  forth  in  the  arch- 
bishop's table  ^  of  1563.     IV.  Archbishops  and  bishops  are  to 

were  prohibited  by  royal  authority  in  the  year  1565-66.  Such  is  the  acknowledged 
basis  of  tlie  "  Purclias  judgment,"  which  made  the  use  of  these  vestments  penal. 
Messrs.  MaccoU  and  Parker  have  exhaustively  exposed  the  fallacies  which  underlie 
these  assumptions.  "Were  it  not  a  practical  matter,  the  idea  of  this  "malleus 
Puritanorum  "  being  dug  up  to  belabour  the  very  party  in  whose  interests  it  was 
forged  would  perhaps  provoke  a  smile.  In  view,  however,  of  the  persecution  of 
the  Rubricists  for  which  this  decision  was  the  apology,  impartial  persons  must 
deplore  a  flagrant  miscarriage  of  justice. 

'  The  Puritiinical  had  been  aggrieved  by  the  occasional  use  of  the  chancel  for 
prayers,  and  would  fain  have  prohibited  this  use  as  a  relic  of  popery.  * 

-  This  table,  which  has  been  retained  unaltered  in  our  Prayei-books,  was  drawn 
up  by  Archbishop  Parker,  to  counteract  the  lax  tt-aching  on  the  subject  which 
foreign  Protestantism  was  now  inttilling  into  English  minds. 


3i8 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


The  "Ad- 
vertis3- 
ments  " 
illustrated 
by  Cecil's 
letter. 


Puritan 
protests. 


"  use  and  continue  their  accustomed  apparel."  Deans,  arch- 
deacons, doctors  of  divinity,  and  otliers  are  to  wear  in  their 
common  apparel  abroad  "  a  side  gown  with  sleeves  straight  at 
the  hand,"  and  "to  wear  tippets  of  sarcenet."  The  "inferior 
ecclesiastical  persons"  are  to  wear  lay  gowns  and  the  square 
cap.  The  nonjuring  clergy  are  to  wear  "none  of  the  said 
apparel  .  .  .  but  to  go  as  mere  laymen  till  they  be  recon- 
ciled to  obedience," 

The  necessity  of  some  of  these  directions  is  shown  by 
Cecil's    summary   of    the    diocesan    reports   in    1564. 
Among  other  marks  of  disorder  are  mentioned  these : 
*'  Some   say  [the  service  and  prayers]    in   a   surplice, 
others  without  a  surplice  ;  ...  in  some  p)laces  the  table 
hath  a  carpet,  in  others  it  hath  not ;  .  .  .  administration 
of  the  Communion  is  done  by  some  with  surjDlice  and 
cap,  some  with  surplice  alone,  others  with  none  :  .  .  . 
some  receive  kneeling,  others  standing,  others  sitting."  ^ 
Even  the  moderate  demands  of  the  "Advertisements  " 
were  offensive  to  the  Puritan  faction.  Pilkington,  Bishop 
of  Durham,  wrote  to  Leicester  for  protection  against  the 
cap  and  surplice,  urging  that  "  in  all  Reformed  countries 
the  belief  and  habit  of  the  Eoman  Church  are  dismissed 
together "    and    "  that   the    godly    in   other   countries 
would  ...  be  strangely  shocked  with  these  reforms." 
To  like  effect  wrote  Whittingham,  who  by  Leicester's 
influence  retained  the  deanery  of  Durham,  though  not 
really  in  Orders.     If,  he  argues,  the  indifferency  of  the 
dress  be  urged,  yet  it  is  undeniable  it  ought  to  be  to 
the  glory  of  God,  and  "  How  can  God's  glory  be  pro- 
moted by'  the  equipage  of  idolatrous  worshij^  ? "     He 
pretends  to  find  an  analogy  in  that  jealous  abstention 
from  the  usages  of  heathens  and  heretics   which  was 
considered  necessary  in  the  early  Church.      Leicester, 
of    course,    abetted     the    aggrieved.    Puritans.      Their 


See  Strype's  Tarker,  ii.    9,  fol.  eJ. 


ELIZABETH.  319 

cause  had  also  the  support  of  the  Earls  of  Bedford  and      chap. 


XI. 


Warwick,  and  of  Walsingham,  Knolles,  and  an  influ- 
ential party  in  the  Commons.  Parker,  however,  and  the 
other  commissioners  were  resolved  to  exert  their 
authority  and  end  the  reign  of  disorder.  About  a  Non-con- 
hundred  and  forty  refractory  London  clergy  were  cited  cieSy"" 
before  the  commissioners  at  Lambeth,  and  required  to  ^^i^'^iggg 
make  the  declaration  of  conformity  attached  to  the  "  Ad- 
vertisements." Some  thirty-seven  refused,  and  were 
consequently  suspended  or  deprived.  Sampson,  Dean  of 
Christ  Church,  and  Humphreys,  President  of  Magdalen, 
Oxford,  were  cited,  as  also  the  most  flagrant  ofiender 
of  all.  Turner,  Dean  of  Wells.  Turner  and  Sampson 
were  deprived.  Humphreys  obtained  a  respite  and 
ultimately  conformed.  It  appears  that  the  cause  of 
the  London  Puritans  excited  much  sympathy  at  Cam- 
bridge. The  students  refused  to  wear  surplices,  and 
their  insubordination  was  countenanced  by  the  masters 
of  Trinity  and  S.  John's. 

The  conduct  of  the  opposite  faction  in  1569-70  gained 
the  Puritans  a  short-lived  and  unmerited  popularity. 
The  policy  of  Eome  on  the  accession  of  Elizabeth  has  Romanist 
been  noticed.  Paul  IV.  had  been  succeeded  in  1559  by 
a  more  sagacious  pontiff,  Pius  IV.  Convinced  that 
nothing  was  to  be  gained  in  England  by  hostility  to 
the  throne,  Pius  made  friendly  overtures  to  Elizabeth. 
AVe  have  it  on  good  authority  that  he  offered  to  sanction 
the  Prayer-book  of  1559,  provided  the  English  Church 
recognized  the  supremacy  of  Pome.^  The  pressure  of 
the  Puritans  rendered  it  impossible  to  accept  reconcilia- 
tion on  such  terms.  In  1566  Pius  V.  became  Pope, 
and  this  conciliatory  policy  was  discarded.     The  first 

'  See  Twisden,  Historical  Vindication  of  tlie  Chuixh  of  England  in  point  of 
Schism,  p.  17j. 


320  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

ciTAP.     effect  of  liis  hostility  was  the  rising  in  the  north,  under 

^]-        the   Earls  of  Northumberland  and  Westmoreland,  in 

1569.     The   insurgents   professed   a   determination   to 

overthrow  the  Eeformation  and  re-establish  the  Pope. 

The  chief  agents  in  this  affair  were  foreign  seminarists. 

In  the  next  year  Pope  Pius  V.  took  a  step  which  not 

only    drove   England    to   the    side   of  the   Protestant 

powers,  but  necessitated  the  prohibition  of  Eomanism 

by  penal  laws.     He  published  a  bull  .excommunicating 

Elizebeth,  and  denouncing  her  as  a  usuirper ;  her  subjects 

Avere   commanded   to  repudiate  their  allegiance  under 

pain  of  excommunication.     This  bull  was  found  posted 

on   the  doors  of  London  House  (April,   1570).^     The 

advanced  Catholics  in  the  ranks  of  the  clergy  seem  to 

have  remained  faithful  to  the  throne  at  this  crisis,  and 

the  queen's  confidence  in  their  loyalty  was  declared  in 

The  her   manifesto.     The   Commons,  however,  thought  fit 

ArticieT^^^  to   subjcct   all   clergymen  to  a   test   of  loyalty   in   a 

madeatest  j.g]^jg,-Qyg  p-^rb.     Evcrv  clerorvman,   whether   ordained 

of  loyalty.  &  &  j  TiJ  •>  ^ 

with  the  present  formulary  or  that  in  use  under  Mary, 
was  to  declare  his  assent  to  the  Thirty-nine  Articles. 
Ko  one  henceforth  was  to  be  ordained  till  he  had  sub- 
scribed   them.      Every   incumbent   was    to    read    the 

'  The  Romish  schism  in  England  dates  from  this  year.  Its  adherents  were  at 
first  governed  by  priests  with  special  commissions  from  Eome,  thea  by  bishops  in 
jmrtibus.  In  our  own  time  Cardinal  Wiseman  introduced  the  practice  of  giving 
these  intruders  English  titles.  The  backbone  of  the  faction  in  1570  was  Dr. 
"William  Allen,  formerly  Prim  ipal  of  St.  Mary's  Hall,  Oxford.  lie  fled  to  Louvain 
on  Elizabeth's  accession,  and  devoted  his  life  to  a  crusade  against  the  Anglican 
('hurch.  Allen  was  placed  at  the  head  of  the  seminary  at  Douay,  established  at 
the  cost  of  Philip  II.  in  1568.  He  was  subsequently  made  a  cardinal.  William 
Persons,  a  Jesuit,  became  rector  of  another  seminary  at  Pome,  and  similar  estab- 
lishments were  founded  at  Valladolid  and  S.  Omer  in  Artois.  Persons  and 
Campion  were  at  tlie  head  of  the  Jesuit  propagandists  who  entered  England  with 
the  view  of  effecting  the  deposition  or  assassination  of  Elizabeth.  Campion  was 
executed  under  circumstances  of  great  cruelty.  But  the  emissaries  suffered  not  lor 
their  religion,  but  their  hostility  to  the  throne.  Mr.  Hallam  admits  that  any  man 
in  this  reign  might  have  saved  his  life  by  denying  the  Pope's  power  to  depose  the 
queen  (Const.  History,  vol.  i.  ch.  iii.  p.  164). 


ELIZABETH.  321 

Articles  to  his  congregation  within  two  months  of  chap. 
his  induction.  The  queen  did  not  share  in  this  panic,  _^^ 
and  had,  as  we  have  already  observed,  some  antipathy  to 
the  Articles.  The  Act  was  carried  in  defiance  of  royal 
prohibition.  When  passed,  the  queen  was  prudent 
enough  to  give  way  and  grant  her  assent.  The  Convo- 
cation which  sat  at  the  same  time  paved  the  way  for 
the  Act  by  issuing  that  final  revision  of  the  Articles 
which  has  been  already  noticed. 

Though  the  Puritans  were  the  party  most  averse  to  cartwright 
subscription,  the  anti-Roman  panic  was,  of  course,  turned  bridge, 
to  the  detriment  of  the  Anglo-Catholics.     At  Cambridge 
Thomas    Cartwright,  Margaret  Professor  of  Divinity, 
denounced   the   Anglican   system   in  such  terms  that 
Whitgift,  the  vice-chancellor,  was    forced  to  put  the 
statutes  in  force,  and  to  expel   him  from    his  office. ^ 
His  friends  in  the  Commons  were  not  so  easily  sup- 
pressed.    The  matter  came  to  a  climax  in  1572,  when 
Mr.    "Wentworth  actually   brought    in  two    "Bills  of  went- 
Reformation,"   proposing   to    reconstruct   the    Church  "Biiisof 
after  the  model  of  the  Calvinistic  sects.     Kow  at  last  S'onT*"^^" 
the  queen  interposed.      She  signified  to  the  Speaker  ^'^  '^^'^^' 
her  desire  that  bills  respecting  religion  should  not  be 
discussed    until    accepted   by   Convocation.      She  de- 
manded Mr.  Wentworth's  bills,  read   them,  returned 
them  with  strong  expressions  of  disa];)proval,  and  ordered 
that  the  matter  should  drop.     Baulked  in  the  House, 
the  faction  betook  itself  to  the  arena  of  controversial 
literature.     Five  or  six  of  the  leading  Puritan  divines, 

'  Thomas  Cartwright  ranks  first  in  learning  and  ability  among  the  non- 
conforming Puritans  of  this  reign.  The  spread  of  Puritanism  at  Cambridge  was 
mainly  due  tc  his  teaching  in  the  lecture-room  and  university  pulpit.  The  "  Second 
Admonition"  is  entirely  his  work.  Whitgift,  as  primate,  behaved  with  great 
generosity  to  Cartwright.  It  is  said  that  the  latter  modified  his  views  in  later  life, 
and  on  his  deathbed  expressed  his  regret  for  the  trouble  he  had  given  to  the  rulers 
of  our  Church. 

Y 


322  ECCLESIA    ANGLICANA. 

aided  by  Cartwriglit,  who  was  now  living  at  Antwerp, 
composed   an   elaborate  treatise   against   the    Church. 
The  "First  It  is  stvlcd  the  "  First  and  Second  Admonition,"  and 

and  Second  .„  ,..  ,  ,,  ,  -r-kT 

Admoni-  consists  01  two  religioiis  theses  addressed  to  Parliament. 
The  doctrine  and  discipline  which  these  men  had 
hitherto  pretended  to  accept  were  now  bitterly  de- 
nounced, and  the  Calvinistic  principles  advocated.  The 
appearance  of  this  work  caused  a  great  sensation.  The 
queen,  to  whose  inertness  this  upgrowth  of  dissent  was 
mainly  due,  had  the  audacity  to  attribute  it  to  episcopal 
negligence.  She  now  appointed  a  body  of  lay  com- 
missioners, who  should  assist  the  bishops  in  making 
Tests  search  for  non-conforming  clergy.     The  tests  to  which 

suspected  suspectcd  iucumbeuts  were  subjected  were  the  three 
c  erg-ymen.  ^fterwards  applied  to  all  clergymen  by  Archbishop 
Whitgift.  A  declaration  was  to  be  subscribed  ap- 
proving of  the  Prayer-book,  Articles,  and  royal 
supremacy.  Forms  of  recantation  for  such  as  had  been 
hitherto  disorderly  were  provided.  The  three  tests 
worked  a  salutary  clearance  in  one  diocese  where  the 
charge  of  negligence  was  indeed  well  deserved.  Park- 
hurst,  Bishop  of  Norwich,  was  a  notorious  fautor  of 
the  sectaries.  According  to  Neal,  three  hundred  non- 
conforming priests  were  discovered  in  this  diocese  and 
suspended.  An  answer  to  the  "  Admonitions "  was 
written  by  Cartwright's  old  enemy,  Whitgift. 
Death  of  On  May  17,  1575,  the  Church  of  England  lost  the 

Pa^ker^"^  prelate  who  had  so  wisely  guided  her  course  through 
this  stormy  and  perplexing  period,  and  whose  claims 
on  the  gratitude  of  posterity  are  enhanced,  because  he 
reaped  little  but  hostility  and  indifference  while  living. 
"  Almost  entirely  by  his  skill,"  it  has  been  well  said, 
"  the  vessel  he  was  called  to  pilot  has  been  saved  from 
breaking  on  the  rock  of  mediaeval  superstitions,  or  else 


ELIZABETH.  323 

drifting  away  into  the  whirlpool  of  licentiousness  and      chap. 

unbelief."  ^   Despite  his  naturally  retiring  and  cautious     ^y 

disposition,  Matthew  Parker's  services  as  primate  place 
him  on  a  level  with  the  p'ceclara  nomina  of  Canter- 
bury— with  Theodore,  Langton,  and  Laud.  Parker's 
literary  performances  in  connection  with  the  Articles 
and  Homilies  have  been  mentioned.  It  may  be  noticed 
that  he  was  the  earliest  explorer  in  the  field  of  Anglo- 
Saxon  literature,  his  researches  in  this  direction  being 
ever  inspired  by  the  conviction  that  the  Church  over 
which  he  presided  was  one  with  the  Church  of 
Augustine  and  Bede  and  Elfric.  Matthew  Parker's 
library,  the  last  and  most  valuable  of  numerous  bene- 
factions to  his  alma  mater,-  is  still  the  pride  of  Corpus 
Chiisti,  Cambridge.  Parker  enjoyed  the  extreme  ill 
will  of  the  Puritans,  because  his  sound  wisdom  and 
large-hearted  tolerance  had  allowed  them  neither  to 
decatholicize  the  Church  nor  to  pose  as  martyrs.  Their 
malignity  survived  for  3'ears  after  his  death.  It  at 
last  bad  the  gratification  of  insulting  his  memory,  as 
the  Marian  inquisitors  had  insulted  that  of  Bucer,  his 
body  being  torn  up  from  its  resting-place  in  Lambeth 
Chapel  and  cast  on  a  dunghill,  in  the  troublous  times 
of  Charles  I.  The  remains  were  recovered  and  re- 
interred  by  Sancroft. 

'  Hardwicke,  Hist,  of  the  Articles,  p,  117, 


324 


ECCLESJA    ANGLICANA. 


CHAPTER  XII. 


Edmund 

Grindal 

primate. 


lEUjalJcti) — continued. 
A.D.  1576-1603. 

Edmund  Grindal  primate— His  Puritanical  proclivities — The  "  prophesyings  " — 
Grindal  falls  foul  of  the  queen — Grindal  under  suspension — Comes  to  terms 
with  the  queen — John  Whitgilt  primate— Disorderly  sectaries — The  Independ- 
ents— The  Anabaptists — The  Familists — Many  clergymen  Dissenters  at  heart 
— Whitgift  not  intimidated— Whitgift's  three  tests— The  Puritan  clergy  cannot 
accept  these  tests — Their  patrons  at  court  try  conclusions  with  Whitgift — 
Whitgift's  twenty-four  Articles— Reaction  against  Puritans — The  Marprelate 
libels— Puritanism  in  disrepute — State  of  the  Church  at  the  end  of  the  reign — 
The  bishops  are  becoming  despotic — Episcopal  courts — Erastian  opinions — 
Hooker's  "  Ecclesiastical  Polity  " — The  Sunday  question — The  Predestination 
controversy — The  Lambeth  Articles — Not  accepted  by  the  Church — Yet  Cal- 
vinistic  views  still  predominate. 

The  Elizabethan  Eeformation  is  so  mucli  tlie  work  of 
Matthew  Parker,  that  the  student  will  not  be  detained 
long  by  the  remaining  twenty-eight  years  of  this  reign. 
In  her  choice  of  a  new  primate  the  queen  was  singularly 
unfortunate.  Edmund  Grindal  had  been  chaplain  to 
Bishop  Eidley,  and  in  Mary's  reign  was  one  of  the 
refugees.  He  settled  at  Strasburg,  where  he  is  heard 
of  as  trying  to  mediate  between  the  factions  which 
disturbed  the  peace  of  the  English  at  Frankfort.  He 
returned  in  1558,  and  was  selected  on  account  of  his 
learning  to  take  a  leading  part  in  the  religious  settle- 
ment. He  has  been  mentioned  as  one  of  the  royal 
visitors,  and  as  one  of  the  commissioners  who  revised 
the  Prayer-book.  Grindal  entertained  a  far  lower 
view  of  the  Church  than  that  which  guided  his  friends 
Parker  and  Burleigh.     He  deferred  to  the  opinions  of 


ELIZABETH.  325 

Bullinger  and  other  foreigners  of  inferior  attainments  chap. 
to  himself,  and  allowed  the  Puritan  party  in  his  diocese  ^.Si— 
of  London  to  get  the  upper  hand.     Archbishop  Parker  his  Pun- 

.  -  .  /v  1  tanical  pro- 

respected  the  piety  and  learning  of  his  suffragan,  but  cUvities. 
must   often  have  been  grieved  by  his  lax  administra- 
tion.    It  was,  perhaps,  to  get  rid  of  him  that  he  used 
his  interest  to  secure  Grindal   the   northern  primacy 
in  1570.     In  the  north  Puritan  innovations  were  un- 
popular.     Grindal's  "  Articles  of  Visitation  "  ^  tell  us 
that  the  primate  of  the  north  warred  with  unnecessary 
intolerance  against  certain  time-honoured  practices  and 
ceremonies  which  pious  minds  found  iiseful  as  accessories 
to  devotion.   He  forbids  the  custom  of  praying  on  beads, 
and  that  of  making  the  sign  of  the  cross  on  entering 
church ;  the  priests  are  not  to  use  gestures  not  specified 
by  the  Prayer-book ;  the  consecrated  bread  is  not  to  be 
put  in  the  mouths  of  the  communicants ;  nor  are  stone 
altars  to  be  used.     That  such  a  prelate  was  promoted 
to  the  vacant  throne  at  Canterbury  can  only  be  accounted 
for  by  the  influence  of  Leicester  and  other  pretended 
Puritans  at  court.     Their  Puritanism  being  merely  ill 
will  to  an  institution  which  they  wished  to  despoil,  it 
was  natural  this  faction  should  desire  a  Low  Churchman 
at  Canterbury.     Grindal  became  primate  of  all  England 
on  February  15,  1576.     His  principles  soon  set  him  at 
issue  with  the  queen  herself,  and  the  dispute  and  its 
results  are  all  we  need  record  of  this  primacy.     The  The  "pro- 
Puritanical  clergy  had  for  some  time  delighted  in  an^  esymgs. 
exercise  which  they  called  "  prophesying."     They  as- 
sembled from  time  to  time  at  selected  centres  for  the 
purpose  of  discussing  a  prescribed  religious  topic.     In 
deference  to  S.  Paul's   injunctions  in   1   Cor.  xiv.   31, 
the  members  of  these  assemblies  "  prophesied  one  by 

'  See  Collier,  Eccles.  Hist.,  vi.  501. 


126 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


CHAP. 
XII. 


Grindal 
falls  foul  of 
tlie  queen. 
Dec.  1576. 


one  " — in  other  words,  debated  in  turn  on  the  text  or 
topic  under  treatment — and  a  president,  to  whom  they 
gave  the  Presbyterian  title  "  moderator,"  summed  up. 
The  "  prophesy ings  "  are  first  heard  of  at  Northampton 
in  1571.  They  became  particularly  popular  in  the 
Norwich  diocese.  Harmless  enough  ostensibly,  this 
exercise  was  likely  to  lead  to  dangerous  results  in  a 
period  of  unsettled  religious  opinion.  The  temptation 
to  decry  tenets  and  practices  which  the  "  Acts  of  Uni- 
formity "  and  "  Supremacy  "  had  made  sacrosanct  would 
probably  be  irresistible.  So  thought  the  queen  and 
Matthew  Parker.  The  latter  succeeded  in  sujopressing 
the  "  prophesyings  "  even  in  the  Norwich  diocese,  where 
Parkhurst's  opposition  was  abetted  by  four  privy  coun- 
cillors. The  new  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  was  rash 
enough  to  attempt  to  revive  the  objectionable  practice. 
He  issued  some  printed  directions  for  the  management 
of  "prophesyings."  The  queen  gave  a  peremptory 
order  that  the  exercise  should  be  discontinued.  Grindal 
declined  to  countenance  this  invasion  of  his  jurisdiction. 
He  wrote  a  letter  defending  the  "  prophesyings,"  and 
complaining  of  the  queen's  interference  in  matters  of 
faith  and  religion — "  things  of  which  nature,"  he 
urged,  "  are  to  be  decided  in  the  Church,  and  not  in  the 
palace."  That  this  was  a  well-deserved  rebuke  is  un- 
deniable, whatever  our  opinion  of  the  merits  of  "  pro- 
phesyings." The  queen,  however,  was  unmoved.  She 
proceeded  to  write  to  the  bishops  herself.  She  declared 
that  "by  setting  up  unlawful  assemblies  the  people 
were  drawn  to  places  lemote  from  their  parishes,  and 
entertained  with  disputations  upon  points  of  divinity 
very  improper  for  a  vulgar  audience;"  and  "that  by 
this  means  many  of  her  subjects  were  carried  off  to  idle- 
ness and  schism."     The  bishops  were  commanded  not  to 


ELIZABETH.  327 

suffer  any  public  religious  exercises  besides  those  of  chap. 
the  Prayer-book  and  the  Sunday  sermon  of  the  incum-  .  ^"' 
bent.  If  the  incumbent  was  not  qualified  to  preach, 
he  was  to  read  one  of  the  Homilies.  For  his  disrespect  Grmdai 
io  royal  authority  Grindal  was  confined  to  his  house  suspension, 
and  suspended  for  six  months.  When  this  period  had 
elapsed,  he  was  urged  to  make  some  acknowledgment 
of  his  fault  to  the  Star  Chamber ;  but  he  refused  to  be 
restored  to  royal  favour  on  such  terms.  It  appears 
that  the  queen  seriously  thought  of  depriving  Grindal. 
Her  Council  persuaded  her  to  be  satisfied  with  his 
sequestration  ah  officio.  What  was  the  extent  of  this 
penalty  is  not  plain.  Grindal  certainly  issued  charges, 
and  even  served  as  an  ecclesiastical  commissioner,  while 
under  sequestration.  In  other  functions  he  appears  to 
have  been  represented  by  his  friend  Whitgift,  now 
Bishop  of  Worcester.  The  primate's  resistance  was 
regarded  with  approval  by  a  great  many  of  the  queen's 
subjects,  and  both  Houses  of  Convocation  addressed  peti- 
tions to  the  queen,  imploring  her  to  reinstate  him. 
Grindal,  on  the  other  hand,  who  was  growing  old  and 
blind,  was  anxious  to  resign  the  archbishopric.  This 
the  despotic  sovereign  would  not  allow.  It  appears  comes  to 
that  a  compromise  was  effected  in  1582.  In  that  year  the'Su^n.^ 
the  writs  and  instruments  again  run  in  Grindal's 
own  name ;  and  Strype  gives  a  letter  of  the  same  date 
in  which  the  primate  tenders  a  qualified  submission. 
He  shortly  afterwards  received  permission  to  resign 
on  a  pension.  Before  the  negotiations  on  this  sub- 
ject were  completed,  Grindal  had  died,  worn  out  by 
old  age  and  increasing  infirmities  (July  6,  1583).  It 
appears  that  the  queen  became  more  reconciled  to  the 
"  prophesyings."  In  1585  the  Bishop  of  Chester,  in 
giving  directions  for  their  conduct,  speaks  of  them  as 
approved  of  by  her  Majesty's  Privy  Council. 


328  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

CHAP.  In  her  next  appointment  of  a  primate  Elizabeth  was 

^"-  more  judicious.  We  have  already  mentioned  John 
Whitgift  as  taking  an  active  part  against  Cartwright 
at  Cambridge.  "Whitgift  was  one  of  the  many  great 
divines  of  this  period  whose  names  are  connected  with 
Pembroke  Hall.  He  was  befriended  and  patronized 
by  Bishop  Eidley,  and  is  said  to  have  been  one  of  his 
chaplains.  In  1555  he  became  a  fellow  of  Peterhouse, 
and  during  the  troubles  of  Mary's  reign  he  was  allowed 
to  continue  his  studies  at  Cambridge  unmolested. 
Shortly  after  Elizabeth's  accession  he  was  elected  to 
the  headship  of  Peterhouse  and  Pembroke,  and  in  1570 
became  Master  of  Trinity.  His  fame  as  a  preacher 
extending  to  the  Court,  he  was  honoured  with  marked 
favour  by  Elizabeth,  and  was  appointed  Dean  of  Lincoln. 
The  Puritan  faction  at  Cambridge  were  probably  more 
noisy  than  numerous.  When  Whitgift  finally  left  the 
university  for  the  see  of  Worcester,  in  1576,  he  was 
attended  by  an  immense  cavalcade  of  friends  and 
admirers.  The  appointment  of  Whitgift  as  Grindal's 
successor  was  extremely  popular,  and  he  did  not  dis- 
appoint the  public  expectation.  He  was  the  better 
able  to  do  justice  to  his  high  office  in  that  he  was  a 
man  of  large  private  means,  and  therefore  was  less 
hampered  than  his  predecessors  by  the  impoverishment 
of  the  see  and  the  queen's  continual  exactions.  Whit- 
gift's  chief  claim  to  distinction  is  his  success  as  a  dis- 
Disorderiy  ciplinariau.  It  was  at  this  time  absolutely  necessary 
that  something  should  be  done  to  suppress  the  turbu- 
lence of  the  ultra-Protestants,  who,  during  Grindal's 
primacy,  had  met  with  little  opposition.  The  Preci- 
sians had  already  gone  the  length  of  forming  a  distinct 
sect,  and  in  1573  established  their  first  "presbytery" 
at  Wandsworth.      They  were  rivalled  by  three  other 


ELIZABETH.  329 

sectarian  systems — the  Brownists,  afterwards  notorions 
as  the  sect  of  Congregationalists  or  Independents ;  the 
Anabaptists;  and  the  Eamilists,  or  Family  of  Love. 
The  distinguishing  traits  of  the  first-named  sect  were  The  inde- 
disintegration  and  rejection  of  authority — each  congre-  ^^"^  ^^*^' 
gation  being  allowed  to  choose  its  own  forms  of  doctrine 
and  discipline.  The  principles  of  Christianity  were 
thus  placed  at  the  mercy  of  the  ignorant  many.  It  was 
taught  that  private  interpretation  of  Scripture  was  the 
foundation  of  religion  ;  and  that  not  the  wise  or  learned, 
but  the  man  who  made  most  show  of  piety,  was  the 
soundest  interpreter.  What  hypocrisy,  arrogance,  and 
ignorant  bigotry  this  system  engendered  was  seen 
in  the  next  century,  when  the  great  movement  in 
favour  of  constitutional  government  brought  the  "  In- 
dependents "  to  the  fore  and  tested  their  pretensions  as 
friends  of  liberty.  The  founder  of  the  sect  was  Eobert 
Brown,  a  Puritan  Norfolk  clergyman,  who  disturbed 
England  by  rancorous  abuse  of  the  Church  during  the 
years  1570-1580.  It  is  shameful  to  record  that  while 
two  ignorant  followers  who  circulated  his  scurrilous 
pamphlets  were  hanged,  the  real  author  of  the  mischief 
was  repeatedly  restored  to  liberty  by  the  influence  of 
Lord  Burleigh,  his  kinsman.  Being  at  last  menaced 
by  the  High  Commission  Court,  he  retired  to  Holland, 
the  nursery  of  Protestant  eccentricities.  Even  here  his 
love  of  dissidence  embroiled  him.  In  Scotland,  equally 
full  of  religious  discord  and  confusion.  Brown  got  im- 
prisoned, and  he  preferred  to  tax  again  the  mercies  of  the 
English  Church.  His  turbulent  conduct  at  Northampton 
induced  the  bishop  of  the  diocese  to  excommunicate  him. 
Shortly  after  this  sentence,  he  appears  to  have  been 
pricked  with  remorse.  He  recanted,  and  making  his 
peace  with  the  Church  obtained  a  living,  where  he  died 


330 


ECCLESIA    ANGLICANA. 


The 
Familists. 


Many 
clerg^nien 
Dissenters 
at  heart. 


at  an  advanced  age,  in  1630.  But  the  fire  whicli  this 
eccentric  person  had  thrown  in  sport  was  not  quenched 
by  his  conversion.  To  the  Anabaptists  we  have  fre- 
quently alluded  as  a  most  dangerous  sect  of  socialists, 
whose  turbulence  from  time  to  time  roused  the  righteous 
indignation  of  the  secular  powers,  and  made  Gallios 
pose  as  champions  of  Church  discipline.  In  the  exer- 
cise of  their  private  judgment  these  sectaries  denied  all 
rights  of  property  and  all  forms  of  government.  They 
consecrated  incest  and  adultery  by  renouncing,  on  re- 
ligious^ principles,  the  customary  restraints  on  sexual 
intercourse.  On  the  same  plea  they  broke  every  engage- 
ment or  pledge  by  which  the  magistrates  bound  them 
to  keep  the  peace.  This  sect  gave  the  authorities  even 
more  trouble  than  the  newly  formed  Eomish  party. 
The  severities  of  Henry's,  Edward's,  and  Mary's  reigns 
were  again  found  necessary,  and  the  queen  insisted  that 
the  penalty  should  be  burning,  not,  as  Foxe  the  martyr- 
ologist  desiied,  hanging.  The  Familist  sect  was  one  of 
the  many  strange  formations  which  trace  their  birth  to 
that  ultra-Protestant  principle  which  has  been  termed 
"  Bibliolatry."  By  dreaming  over  the  text  of  Scripture 
the  Familists  evolved  an  absurd  sj^stem  of  mysticism. 
They  appear  to  have  denied  the  fads  of  the  Incarna- 
tion, Resurrection,  etc,  while  treating  the  letter  of  the 
sacred  history'-  with  a  reverence  like  that  of  the  Jewish 
Cabalists.  These  strange  enthusiasts  were  often  ex- 
posed to  persecution,  because  confounded  with  the  other 
really  pernicious  sects.  They  were,  therefore,  even 
more  hostile  to  the  ultra-Puritans  than  to  the  Church. 

"While  such  were  the  leading  forms  of  dissent  when 
Whitgift  was  appointed  to  the  primacy,  the  Church 
itself  still  contained  a  traitorous  clique,  who  had  taken 
Orders  with  the  deliberate  intention  of  subverting  the 


ELIZABETH.  331 

Anglican  system  and  substituting  for  the  Prayer-Look 
some  such  work  as  Cartwright's  "  Book  of  Discipline." 
Among  this  party  aspirants  to  the  ministry  were 
required  to  submit  to  a  "  call "  from  a  classis  or 
assembly  of  Puritan  clergymen.  The  call  was,  of 
course,  regarded  as  the  real  sacrament  of  Orders.  For 
the  episcopal  system  and  all  Catholic  ceremonial  these 
men  had  a  downright  hatred.  How  far  this  might  be 
disguised  for  the  sake  of  expedience  was  a  favourite 
topic  of  discussion  in  the  classis.  When  unrestrained, 
these  Puritan  clergy  would  openly  deny  the  efficacy  of 
the  sacraments,  and  rail  against  the  Liturgy.  The  one 
religious  exercise  which  they  reverenced  was  their  own 
preaching.^ 

The  work  which  lay  before  Whitgift  was  just  such  WMtgift 

T    •  TT  1       °°*  intimj- 

as  suited  his  abilities.  He  was  not  a  persecutor,  as  he  dated, 
has  been  represented  by  the  Congregationalist  his- 
torians, but  he  understood  the  importance  of  discipline, 
and  could  maintain  it.  He  was  determined  that  the 
Church  should  no  longer  be  the  cat's-])aw  of  the 
Puritan  clerical  "  ring "  and  its  self-seeking  partisans 
at  court.  AVhat  Whitgift's  boldness  was  when  a 
righteous  cause  was  to  be  maintained,  may  be  inferred 
from  the  plain-spoken  rebuke  which  he  had  addressed 
to  the  queen  before  his  translation  to  Canterbury.  He 
did  not  shrink  from  telling  Elizabeth  that  the  spoliation 
of  the  Church  which  she  had  sanctioned  was  a  violation 
of  the  Great  Charter,  and  a  deviation  from  the  practice 
of  Christian  rulers.^   The  queen  probably  respected  him 

'  The  diocese  of  Norwich,  under  the  administration  of  Bishop  Parkhurst,  had 
become  a  hotbed  of  nonconformity  of  this  type.  Complaints  of  this  diocese  were 
made  before  Convocation,  in  1586,  "that  unworthy  persons  were  ordained  and 
instituted;  .  .  .  the  Communion  not  at  all,  or  but  in  part,  usid  and  observed; 
.  .  .  the  wearing  of  the  surplice  refused;  .  .  .  the  Communion  was  received  by 
many  sitting,  and  those  that  conformed  to  the  Church  called  'time-servers.'" — 
Cardwell's  Synodalia,  vol.  ii.  p.  565. 

^  See  the  letter  in  Whitgift's  Works,  vol.  iii.  p.  xiii. 


332  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

CHAP,     the  more  for  this  honest  expression  of  opinion.     At  all 
-  ^"^      events,   Whitgiit   lost   nothing   by   it.      The   task   of 
whitgrift's  purging  the  clerical  body  was  made  easier  for  Whitgift 
AD.  1583.    by  the  queens  enforcement  of  the  three  tests  m  1583. 
The  statutes  required,  though  the  bishops  seldom  ap- 
plied the  test,  that  the  Prayer-book,  Articles,  and  royal 
supremacy  should  be  acknowledged  by  all  clergymen. 
The  Puritans  disliked  the  Prayer-book,  chafed  under 
the  doctrinal  restrictions  of  the  Articles,  and  were  as 
opposed  to  royal  supremacy  on  anarchical  principles 
as  the  Eomanists  were   from  deference  to  the  Pope. 
"Whitgift,  after   consultation  with  the   bishops   of  his 
province,    drew  up  some  canons,  wherein  these  three 
tests  were  set  forth  as  the  Church's  security  against 
false  brethren. 

The  sixth  canon,  which  embodied  these  tests,  runs 
thus : — 

"  That  none  be  permitted  to  preach,  read,  catechize,  minister 
the  sacraments,  or  execute  any  ecclesiastical  function,  by  what 
authority  soever  he  be  admitted  thereto,  imless  he  first  consent 
and  subscribe  to  these  Articles  following  before  the  ordinary  of 
the  diocese." 

The  three  Articles  are — 

(1)  That  the  queen  has  supreme  power  over  her  subjects  of 
all  estates,  and  that  no  foreign  "  Power,  prelate,  State,  or 
potentate"  has  any  jurisdiction,  power,  etc.,  in  this  realm. 
(2)  That  the  Prayer-book  and  ordinal  contain  nothing  contrary 
to  the  Word  of  Gud,  and  that  the  subscriber  will  use  the  form 
of  the  said  book  prescribed,  in  public  prayer  and  administration 
of  the  sacraments,  and  none  other.  (3)  That  the  subscriber 
"alloweth"  the  Book  of  Articles  agreed  upon  in  the  Convoca- 
tion of  1562,  and  "  believeth "  them  "  to  be  agreeable  to  the 
Word  of  God." 

The  need  of  discipline  can  be  appreciated  when  we 


ELIZABETH.  ZZI 

find  tliat  these  three  reasonable  tests,  which,  are  in 
effect  still  applied  to  every  candidate  for  ordination,  drew 
from  the  Puritan  clerery  a  howl  of  indi^rnation.     The  The  Puri- 

^^  .  .  tan  clergry 

tests  were  nothing  new,  but  the  bishops  had  hitherto  cannot 
been  careless  or  indifferent,  and  men  who  hated  the  these  tests. 
Prayer-book  had  taken  Holy  Orders  for  the  sake  of 
emolument,   or   with   the   more   traitorous   purpose   of 
undermining   the   Anglican   system.      Henceforth   the 
bishops  were  to  see  that  their  clergy  literally  subscribed 
to  the  crucial  propositions,  and  the  shifty  evasions  of  the 
Puritan  clergy  were  rendered  impossible.    Several  were 
deprived.     They  appealed  to  their  lay  patrons  at  court,  Their 
and  the  Council,  not  knowing  what  sort  of  man  they  cJurt^ry* 
had  to  deal  with,  summoned  Whitgift  with  the  intention  ^^J^^^^°''^ 
of  cowing  him.    The  archbishop  replied  that  he  himself  whitgift. 
was  the  proper  person  to  hear  the  complaints  of  the 
deprived  ministers,  and  that  "  the  matter  was  not  in- 
cident to  that  honourable  board."     The  queen  was  wise 
enough  to  express  her  sympathy  with  the  primate,  and 
the  Council  thought  it  better  to  be  silent.     Whitgift, 
who   ever   blended    mercy   with    justice,    showed    the 
greatest  deference  to  individual  scruples,  and  won  over 
many  of  the  malcontents.    He  was  determined,  however, 
that  the  Church  should  be  thoroughly  purged  of  Dis- 
senters in  clerical  disguise,  and  he  supplemented  his 
former  publication  with  a  body  of  twenty-four  Articles  whiteift's 
which  suspected  clergymen  might  be  called  upon  to  f^r'^^^" 
sign.     The  Articles   were  not  well  devi.scd,  and  this  -^^^^^^^^ 
proceeding,  besides  infuriating  Leicefeter,  Knolles,  and 
the  Puritan  statesmen,  elicited   a  remonstrance  from 
one  of  the  soundest  Churchmen,  Cecil  Lord  Burleigh. 
A  fierce  battle  was  for  some  time  carried  on  between 
the  two  parties.     Bills,  supported  by  popular  petitions, 
were  moved  in  the  Commons  in  1534  and  1587,  to  the 


334  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

CHAP,      effect  that  episcopacy  shoulil  be  abolished  and  a  Puri- 
^"-  .     tan  "  Directory  "  substituted  for  the  Prayer-book.     The 
queen's  firm  support  of  Whitgift  prevented  the  anti- 
Chiirch  party  from  securing  any  advantage.    Soon  their 
own  rancour   and  malignity  completely  alienated  the 
sympathy  of  Parliament  from  the  victims  of  Whitgift's 
Reaction     wholcsomc  Severity.     "  A  reaction  against  the  Puritans 
pSitans.     set  in,  whic1»,  before  the  end  of  the  reign,  was  com- 
pletely established.    They  did  not  again  become  popular 
until  the  mit>chievous  policy  of  the  Stuart  kings  had 
associated  their  cause  with  that  of  liberty  and  justice." 
For   now   the   aggrieved   began   to   have   recourse    to 
practices  which  naturally  rendered  them  odious  to  all 
honest  Englishmen.     The  expedient  of  libelling  their 
opponents  in  scurrilous  anonymous  pamphlets  had  been 
tried   by  the  ultra-Protestant  school  in  the  reigns  of 
The  Henry  VIII.  and  Edward  VI.     In  the  literature  which 

ubeis.  was  now  published  under  the  name  of  "Martin  Mar- 

prelate,"  the  clergy  and  the  principles  of  the  Church  of 
England  were  defamed  with  an  unscrupulous  malignity 
hitherto  unparalleled.  The  attacks  were  extended  to 
the  queen  and  the  statesmen  who  supported  the  Church. 
The  "Martin  Marprelate"  libels  emanated  from  a 
movable  printing  press,  which  was  shifted  from  town 
to  town.  It  was  at  last  captured  at  Manchester  by  the 
Earl  of  Derbj'-,  and  finally  suppressed.  The  parties 
chiefly  implicated  in  this  affair  were  Throgmorton 
and  Fenner,  and  two  suspended  ministers,  Penry  and 
Nicholas  Udal.  Penry,  proving  impervious  to  leniency, 
was  executed  in  1593.  Udal  died  shortly  after  his  im- 
prisonment. The  guilt  of  the  libellers  was  heightened 
by  their  deliberately  choosing  for  their  occasion  a  period 
when  the  Government  was  harassed  by  the  prospect 
of  the  Spanish  invasion.   The  tracts  have  been  reprinted 


AD.  1588. 


ELIZABETH.  335 

in  modern  times.  They  appear  to  be  conspicuous  rather  chap. 
for  gross  and  foul  invective  than  facetiousness.^  The  ^"•, 
titles  of  some  of  these  attacks  are — "  The  Epistle  to  the 
Convocation  House,"  "  The  Epitome,"  "  Bishop  Cooper's 
Admonition,"  "Ha'  ye  any  work  for  a  Cooper?"  "The 
Protestation  of  Martin."  Thomas  Nash  replied  to  the 
libels  in  pamphlets  sometimes  betraying  real  humour; 
and  Cooper,  Bishop  of  Winchester,  was  deputed  to 
publish  the  answers  of  the  several  prelates  who  had 
been  the  objects  of  these  foul  aspersions,  in  a  more 
serious  work  called  "  An  Admonition  to  the  People  of 
England."  Public  feeling  was  soon  on  the  side  of  the  Puritanism 
Church.  How  completely  the  libellers  had  alienated  repute. 
from  their  cause  the  sympathy  of  the  Commons  is 
shown  by  the  Act  passed  in  1593,  subjecting  such  as 
refused  to  attend  divine  service,  or  impugned  the 
queen's  authority  in  causes  ecclesiastical,  to  imprison- 
ment, and,  in  case  of  persistence,  to  banishment.  The 
consequence  of  this  measure  was  that  the  scurrilous 
contingent  of  the  Puritan  faction  found  it  better  to 
keep  quiet,  while  those  who  were  really  actuated  by 
conscientious  scruples  emigrated.  Holland  was  espe- 
cially favoured  by  the  emigrants.  "  Churches  were 
erected  at  Amsterdam,  Arnheim,  Middelburg,  Leyden, 
and  other  places;  and  probably  never  in  the  history 
of  human  opinion  have  so  many  wild  doctrines  been 
broached,  and  so  many  strange  practices  set  on  foot,  as 
by  these  expatriated  Brownists  and  Barrowists  in  their 
sojourn  among  the  Dutch."  ^ 

The  closing  years  of  Elizabeth's  reign  were  marked  state  of 
by  the  growing  popularity  of   the  Church.     Obvious  Stj^e'^in? 
abuses,  however,  still  lingered.     Ever  since  the  fall  of  °'*^^ 

"  reigru. 

'  See  the  resume  of  choice  terms  in  Heylin's  Presbyterians,  p.  231,  or  Perry's 
Student's  English  Church  History,  pp.  333,  33t. 
»  Perry,  Student's  Eag.  Oh,  Hist.,  p.  337. 


336 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


The 

bishops  are 

becoming: 

despotic. 


courts. 


the  monasteries  the  episcopal  order  had  maintained  an 
undue  predominance  in  the  Anglican  system.     Again 
and  again  the  sovereigns  in  this  period  had  been  forced 
by  the  non-compliant  attitude  of  Convocation  to  invest 
the  primate  with  despotic  authority.     The  pretensions 
of  Canterbury  had  added  dignity  to  the  other  diocesans, 
and  the  bishopric  too  often  appeared  in  the  light  of 
Episcopal    ^11  embryo  papacy.     The  episcopal  courts  were,  more- 
over, badly  managed,  and,  notwithstanding  Whitgift's 
endeavours  to  reform  them,   retained   a   character  for 
peculation  and  injustice.     A  struggle  ensued  between 
the  secular  and  the  ecclesiastical  judges :    the  former 
endeavouring  to  take  as  many  cases  as  possible  out  of 
the  ecclesiastical  sphere  by  means  of  "  prohibitions " 
from  the  courts  of  common  law.     Even  the  Court  of 
Bigh  Commission  was  subjected  to  these  prohibitions. 
This  antagonism  was  destined  to  lead  to  most  serious 
results  in  the  subsequent  reigns.     Another  consequence 
of  the  bishops  overriding  Convocation  was  the  infusion 
of  Erastian  sentiments   among  the   clergy.     Many  of 
the  earlier  Elizabethan  divines  appear  to  lose  sight  of 
the  Catholic  claims  of  our  Church,  and  to  base    the 
Anglican  system  mainly  on  the  authority  of  the  sove- 
leign  to  appoint  forms  of  Church  government.     Even 
Whitgift  seems  not  to  have  recognized  the  weakness 
of  such  principles.     Bancroft,  Bishop  of  London,  how- 
ever, defended  Anglicanism  from  a  more  tenable  position, 
and  boldly  attacked  the  Presbyterian  assumption  that 
bishops  were  *'  unscriptural,"  in  a  memorable  sermon 
at  Paul's  Cross  in  February,  1589. 

Adrian  Saravia,  a  foreign  divine  resident  in  England, 
took  yet  higher  ground  when  he  claimed  for  episcopacy 
divine  origin,  on  the  plea  that  the  primitive  Churches 
in  every  country  had  bishops,  and  that  this  would  not 


Erastian 
opinions. 


ELIZABETH.  337 

have  been  the  case  had  not  the  Apostles  regarded 
episcopacy  as  an  essential  part  of  the  system  founded 
by  Christ.^  Saravia's  views  are  qualified  in  Hooker's  Hooker's 
celebrated  treatise  on  "  The  Laws  of  Ecclesiastical  asticai 
Polity,"  published  in  1600.  Hooker,  as  Master  of  the  '^°^^^^-" 
Temple,  had  met  with  violent  opposition  from  the 
Puritan  Travers,  who,  though  not  properly  ordained, 
but  only  "  called "  to  the  ministry  by  a  congregation 
at  Antwerp,  had  himself  aspired  to  the  mastership. 
Disappointed  in  this  aim,  Travers  in  his  capacity  as 
afternoon  lecturer  at  the  Temple  endeavoured  to  con- 
trovert the  doctrines  preached  by  the  Master  in  the 
morning.  Archbishop  Whitgift  suspended  Travers  on 
the  twofold  charge  of  being  disorderly  and  not 
being  properly  ordained,^  and  to  justify  his  suspension 
Hooker  wrote  his  famous  work.  Hooker,  of  course, 
holds  with  Saravia  and  Bancroft  that  the  episcopal 
authority  is  derived  from  the  Apostles  themselves. 
He  weakens  his  case,  however,  by  admitting  that  in- 
asmuch as  the  everlasting  continuance  of  episcopacy 
was  not  enjoined,  it  might  be  conceivable  that  the 
Church  should  adopt  some  other  system  of  government, 
upon  urgent  cause. 

The  other  burning  controversies  of  the  day  related  to  The 
the  observance  of  the  Sunday,  and  the  doctiine  of  q^s'tion. 
predestination.  The  features  which  now  distinguish 
our  insular  Sunday  from  that  of  other  nations  were 
almost  unknown  in  Elizabeth's  reign,  and  divines  only 
levelled  their  censures  against  buying,  selling,  and  play- 
ing games  during  hours  of  divine  service.  The  spirit  in 
which  the  day  was  regarded  is  illustrated  by  the  order 
in  Parker's  "Advertisements"   that  "in  all  fairs  and 

*  Saravia,  De  Diversis  Ministorum  gradibus,  published  in  1591. 

*  See  Strype's  Whitgift,  iii.  185 ;  Hooker's  Answer,  $  17. 


338  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

CHAP,  common  markets  falling  upon  the  Sunday  there  be  no 
_^"-  showing  of  any  wares  hefore  the  service  he  dories  The 
first  attempt  to  confound  the  Lord's  Day  with  the 
Jewish  Sabbath  was  made  by  a  Puritan  minister,  Dr. 
Bound,  in  a  work  published  in  1595.  His  disallow al 
of  such  Sunday  sports  as  shooting,  fencing,  and  bowl- 
ing, caused  no  less  astonishment  than  indignation,  and 
was  set  down,  perhaps  with  justice,  to  a  desire  to  exalt 
the  Sunday  at  the  expense  of  the  fasts  and  festivals 
of  the  Church.  The  observance  of  Sunday  soon  became 
a  party  question.  Neither  side  would  command  the 
full  sympathy  of  many  modern  religionists.  The  one 
held  the  views  which  were  afterwards  expressed  in 
King  James's  "Book  of  Sports"  wherein  such  amuse- 
ments as  archery,  leaping,  vaulting,  morris-dances, 
etc.,  are  enjoined  for  Sunday  afternoons.  The  Puritan 
preachers,  on  the  other  hand,  argued  that  "to  throw  a 
bowl  on  the  Lord's  Day  was  as  great  a  sin  as  to  kill  a 
man."  ^  That  modification  of  the  Puritan  view  which 
survived,  almost  unquestioned,  through  the  Hanoverian 
period  and  till  the  present  generation,  is  a  memorial  of 
The  pre-  the  administration  of  Cromwell.  The  other  controversy 
contro-  "  shows  how  strongly  prepossessed  the  later  Elizabe- 
versy.  than  divincs  were  on  behalf  of  the  Calvinistic  views  of 

predestination  and  election.  William  Barrett,  a  fellow 
of  Caius  College,  when  preaching  at  Cambridge,  ap- 
pears to  have  decried  the  doctrines  of  "  assurance," 
"  irresistible  grace,"  and  "  particular  election,"  in 
terms  which  a  modern  English  Churchman  would  think 
reasonable  and  orthodox.  The  Cambridge  doctors  were, 
however,  so  imbued  with  Calvinism,  that  Barrett  was 
called  upon  by  the  vice-chancellor  and  the  heads  of 
houses  to  recant.     The  matter  was  eventually  brought 

'  Heylin's  Presbyterians,  p.  310. 


ELIZABETH.  339 

before  Whitglft,  and  an  assembly  of  divines  was  con- 
vened by  him  at  Lambeth.  It  was  actually  proposed 
to  commit  the  Church  to  the  following  tenets : — 

(1)  God  has  from  eternity  predestinated  some  persons  to  life ; 
others  He  has  reprobated  to  death.  (2)  "  This  moving  or  effi- 
cient cause  of  predestination  to  hfe  is  not  the  prevision  of  faith, 
or  of  perseverance,  or  of  good  works,  or  of  anything  which  may 
be  in  the  predestinated,  but  only  the  will  of  the  good  pleasure 
of  God."  (3)  The  number  predestinated  is  limited  before,  and 
cannot  be  increased  or  lessened.  (4)  Those  not  predestinated  to 
life  will  of  necessity  be  damned.  (5)  True  faith  and  sanctifica- 
tion  does  not  fall  away,  and  "does  not  vanish  in  the  elect  either 
totally  or  finally.''  (6)  A  man  endowed  with  justifying  faith 
has  certainty  of  remission  of  sins,  and  of  eternal  salvation. 
(7)  Saving  grace  is  not  conferred  on  all  men  so  as  they  may  be 
saved  if  they  will.  (8)  No  man  can  come  to  Christ  unless  it 
is  given  to  him  and  the  Father  draws  him,  but  all  men  are  not 
drawn  by  the  Father.  (9)  It  is  not  placed  in  the  will  or  power 
of  any  man  to  be  saved. 

These  nine  Calvinistic  propositions,  which  are  known 
as  the  "  Lambeth  Articles,"  were  particularly  offensive 
to  the  queen.  The  university  whence  the  poison  had 
emanated  was  now  to  provide  the  antidote.  Barrett's  Not  ac- 
views  were  those  accepted  by  Peter  Baro,  a  learned  theChiu-cn. 
Frenchman  who  held  the  Margaret  Professorship.  Baro 
preaching  before  the  univeisity,  boldly  maintained  the 
opposite  doctrine  to  that  of  the  Lambeth  Articles.  Again 
the  vice-chancellor  appealed  to  the  archbishop.  But 
in  the  interval  Whitgift  had  consulted  with  his  more 
learned  suffragan,  Andrewes,  and  been  warned  of  the 
Antinomian  tendency  of  the  Calvinistic  paradox.  He 
may  also  have  allowed  due  weight  to  the  fact  that  the 
queen  and  Burleigh  were  both  opposed  to  the  Lambeth 
Articles.  He  contented  himself  with  ordering  Baro 
not  to  meddle  again  with  the  disputed  doctrines,  and 


dominate. 


340  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

CHAP,     the  Lambeth  Articles  were  not  brought  before  Convo- 
^"-  .    cation.     On  the  death  of  Whitaker  the  Calvinist,  the 
queen  appointed   as   Eegius  Professor   at   Cambridge, 
Dr.   Overall,    afterwards   Dean   of  S.   Paul's   and   the 
author  of  the  Catechism  on  the  sacraments. 
Yet  Calvin-      Oxford,  which  produccd  no  divine  of  any  eminence 
stiupre-^    during  this  reign  except  Hooker,  had  become,  under 
the    patronage   of    Leicester   the   chancellor,  and   the 
tuition  of  such  divines  as  Doctors  Eeynolds  and  Hum- 
phrey, even  more  Puritanical  than  the  sister  university. 
This  tendency  at  Oxford  may  to  some  extent  be  re- 
garded as  a  reaction  from  the  Eomanist  proclivities  of 
earlier  days.      According   to   Heylin,   not   only   were 
"  all  the  Calvinian  rigours  in  matters  of  predestination 
and  the  points  depending  thereupon  "  now  received  at 
Oxford  as  the  doctrine  of  the  English  Church,  but  "  the 
Church  of  Eome  was  inveighed  against  as  the  '  whore 
of  Babylon,'  '  the  mother  of  abominations ; '  the  Pope 
as  publicly  maintained  to  be  Antichrist  or  the  man  of 
sin ;    and  that  as  positively  and  majestically  as  if  it 
had  been  one  of  the  Articles  of  the  Christian  faith."  ^ 

^  Heylin's  Laud,  p.  51. 


JAMES  I.  341 


CHAPTER  XIII. 

A.D.  1603-1625. 

Character  of  the  reign — The  term  "  Protestant"  applied  to  the  Church — The  "  Mil- 
lenary Petition  " — The  Hampton  Court  Conference — Its  results — The  Prayer-book 
of  1604— The  Bible  of  1611— Its  origin  and  history— Death  of  Whitgift— Bancroft 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury — The  ex-animo  test — The  Canons  of  1604 — The  Puritan 
controversy — Folly  of  Bancroft's  conduct — The  absolutist  theory — Suppres- 
sion of  Romanists — Restoration  of  episcopacy  in  Scotland — Abbot  Archbishop 
of  Canterbury — Two  heretics  burnt — The  bishops  and  absolutist  principles — 
Unfortunate  position  of  the  inferior  clergy — The  king's  "  Book  of  Sports  " — His 
delegates  to  the  Synod  of  Dort — The  king  turns  on  the  Calvinists — The  Spanish 
match — Lord  Keeper  Williams — His  attempt  to  oust  Abbot  from  the  primacy. 

The  accession  of  a  king  who  liad  shown  favour  to  the 
Scotch  Presbyterians  was  regarded  by  many  faithful 
Churchmen  with  feelings  of  apprehension.  The  Puri- 
tans, hoping  to  gain  by  the  change  of  dynasty,  promptly 
despatched  a  message  of  congratulation  to  Elizabeth's 
successor.  Dr.  Neville,  Dean  of  Canterbury,  was  sent 
by  the  bishops  with  a  similar  message.  He  returned 
with  royal  promises  of  a  reassuring  character.  James 
"  would  maintain  the  government  of  the  late  queen  as 
she  had  left  it  settled."  The  king's  patronage  of  Pres- 
byterianism  had  really  been  only  a  piece  of  policy,  and 
he  had  as  little  sympathy  with  the  Puritans  as  Whit- 
gift himself.  James  had,  in  fact,  learnt  from  experience 
that  the  men  w^ho  denied  prelacy  were  easily  persuaded 
to  disparage  monarchy.  He  accordingly  took  for  his 
maxim  the  words,  "  No  bishop,  no  king." 


342  ECCLESIA    ANGLICANA. 

CHAP.  King  James  was  well  versed  in  tlieolo2:ical  literature, 

XIII  .     . 

— — ^    and  took  an  active  part  in  every  religious  controversy 
ofthe^rei^.  ^^  ^'^^  reign.     His  opinions  were  in  a  state  of  constant 
flux,  and  his  undignified  demeanour  and  utter  want  of 
common  sense  rendered  his  intrusion  on  the  theological 
arena  matter   of  regret  to   sober-minded    Churchmen. 
Persecutors  are  not  always  men  of  fixed  opinions ;  it  is 
no  anomaly,  therefore,  that  in  this  reign  the  practice  of 
punishing  heresy  with  burning  was  resuscitated.     The 
king's  vacillation  and  cruelty  were,  however,  surpassed 
by   his  appetite  for   adulation.      Impatient  of  consti- 
tutional restraints,  he  used  the  bishops  as  tools  to  carry 
out  a  policy  of  absolutism  ;  flatterers  and  men  who  pro- 
fessed to  believe  in  the  divine  right  of  kings  received 
ecclesiastical  preferments,  and  the  Church  of  England 
lost  in  this  reign  the  allegiance  of  many  lovers  of  civil 
and  religious  liberty  who  had  no  real  objection  to  her 
doctrines.     In  one  respect  only  the  Church  gained  by 
the  accession  of   James.     A  rabid  controversialist  by 
temperament,  he  looked  at  nonconformity  from  a  more 
philosophical  point  of  view  than  Elizabeth,  and  religious 
error,  if  persecuted,  was  at  least  tried  on  its  own  merits, 
and  no    longer    confounded   with  the   crime    of   high 
treason.       Under    his    rule,    therefore,    the    Erastian 
opinions    so  prevalent  in   the   late   reign   gave   place 
to  a  higher  view  of  the  relations  of  Church  and  State. 
The  general  tendency  of  the  reign  was  to  emphasize 
sharply  those  distinctive  features  which  separate  the 
Anglican  system  both  from  Komanism  and  sectarianism. 
,    .  It  may  be  noticed  that   to   indicate  this  attitude  the 

Trie  terna  «/  , 

"Protes-     CKnrch  had  now  informally  adopted  the  title   "  Pro- 

tanf'ap-  "  -r»p  n/^iT»> 

plied  to  the  testant,"  «:ivin2:  it  the  sense  of  "  Eeformed  Catholic. 
This  appropriation  of  the  term  is  sanctioned  even  by 
such  Anglicans  as  Andrewes,  Ken,  and  Laud.     It  is  to 


JAMES  L  343 

be  deplored,  as  having  given  rise  to  much  misconception  chap. 
in  modern  times.  Negative  terms  are  seldom  instruc-  — ,— 
tive  as  definitions,  and  the  origin  and  continental  use  of 
this  particular  term  forbade  that  it  should  permanently 
retain  the  force  now  claimed  for  it  by  the  Anglo- 
Catholics — that  of  contradistinction  both  to  Eomanists 
and  to  English  sectarian  formations.-^  Yet  it  does  not 
seem  to  have  been  anticipated  that  these  latter,  in  all 
their  countless  varieties,  should  claim  the  same  or  a 
better  right  to  the  designation. 

Still  hoping  to  secure  concessions  from  the  new  sove-  The 
reign,  some  seven  hundred  and  fifty-two  Puritanical  p^^oS/^ 
clergymen  drew  up  what  they  called  their  "  Millenary 
Petition,"  detailing  their  objections  to  the  Anglican 
system  and  petitioning  for  change.  The  document 
was  temperately  worded,  and  some  of  the  exceptions 
taken  on  minor  points  of  order  and  discipline  appear 
sufficiently  reasonable.  The  subjects  of  complaint 
were  specified  as  "  offences  "  concerning  which  it  was 
humbly  prayed  that  "  some  might  be  removed,  some 
amended,  some  qualified."  They  were  detailed  under 
four  heads:  (1.)  As  to  the  Church  service:  exception 
was  taken  to  the  interrogatories  and  the  sign  of  the 
cross  in  the  Baptismal  Office,  also  to  women's  admin- 
istering Baptism  in  cases  of  emergency;  to  the  Office 
of  Confirmation  ;  to  the  ring  in  the  Marriage  Office;  to 
the  cap  and  surplice  worn  by  the  clergy;  and  to  the 
longsomeness  of  the  Sunday  service.  It  was  asked  that 
would-be  communicants  should  be  examined ;  that 
ministers  should  not  teach  the  people  to  bow  at  the 

'  The  term  Protestant  occurs  in  none  of  the  Church's  formularies.  At  the 
Revolution,  however,  when  our  attitude  towards  Home  was  viewed  mainly  in  its 
political  bearing?,  an  oath  to  maintain  tlie  "  Protestant  Refornn.-d  religion  estab- 
lished by  law  "  was  inserted  in  the  Coronation  Service.  On  the  other  hand,  the 
sovereign  is  invested  with  the  ring  as  "  the  ensign  of  kingly  dignity  and  of  defence 
of  the  Catholick  Faith." 


344  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

CHAP,  name  of  Jesus ;  that  strict  observance  of  the  Lord's 
\  '-'  Day  should  be  taught ;  that  the  terms  "  priest,"  "  abso- 
lution," be  corrected ;  and  that  the  Apocrypha  should 
not  be  read  in  church.  (2.)  As  to  Ministers:  it  was 
asked  that  none,  for  the  future,  be  admitted  but  such  as 
will  preach  diligently ;  that  such  as  cannot  preach  be 
removed  or  pensioned ;  that  non-residency  be  not  per- 
mitted; that  Kiug  Edward's  statute  for  the  lawfulness 
of  ministers'  marriages  be  revived ;  that  the  only  test 
demanded  should  be  the  subscription  to  the  Articles  of 
Eeligion  and  the  king's  supremacy.  (3.)  As  to  Church 
living  and  maintenance :  that  bishops  should  not  hold 
benefices  in  commendam ;  that  other  clergy  should  not 
have  a  plurality  of  benefices  or  dignities ;  that  lay  impro- 
priations should  be  charged  with  a  sixth  or  a  seventh 
for  clerical  maintenance.  (4.)  As  to  Church  discipline : 
that  excommunication  be  issued  according  to  Christ's 
institution,  and  that  it  should  not  proceed  from  lay 
persons,  chancellors,  officials,  etc. ;  that  registrars  and 
others  should  not  put  their  places  out  to  farm;  that 
the  canons  for  the  restraint  of  marriage  at  certain 
seasons  be  reveised,  the  longsomeness  of  suits  in  the 
ecclesiastical  courts  restrained,  and  the  oath  ex  officio 
more  sparingly  used. 

The  petitioners  styled  themselves  "  ministers  of  the 
Gospel  that  desire  not  a  disorderly  innovation,  but  a 
due  and  godly  reformation."  They  desired  a  conference 
between  the  Puritan  and  non-Puritan  clergy  on  the 
topics  above  specified.  Elizabeth  had  refused  the 
Puritan  party  this  concession.  King  James  was  more 
complaisant,  regarding  it  as  a  good  opp(jrtunity  to  dis- 
play his  theological  attainments.  Much  excitement  was 
caused  by  the  publication  of  the  petition.  Oxford  and 
Cambridge  were  particularly  agitated  at  the  prospect  of 


JAMES  I.  345 

being  mulct  of  their  impropriations.  The  king  quieted 
this  anxiety  by  announcing  that  he  would  give  the 
Puritans  a  fair  hearing,  but  that  he  would  do  so  with  ^®p^-  ^®°2- 
the  object  of  protecting  the  Church,  of  which  he  de- 
clared himself  to  be  a  loyal  member.  A  conference  TheHamp- 
was  accordingly  opened  at  Hampton  Court  in  January,  conference. 
1604.  It  was  devoid  of  official  pretensions,  having  been 
summoned  before  the  king  had  even  been  acknowledged 
by  Parliament.  This  perhaps  excuses  certain  infor- 
malities in  the  procedure.  Certainly  the  promise  of 
giving  the  Puritans  a  fair  hearing  cannot  be  said  to 
have  been  fulfilled.  They  were  represented  by  only 
four  divines — Dr.  Reynolds  and  Dr.  Sparke  from  Oxford, 
and  Mr.  Knewstubbs  and  Mr.  Chaderton  from  Cam- 
bridge ;  and  these  representatives  were  nominated,  not 
from  the  Puritan  platform,  but  by  the  king  himself. 
The  Church  was  represented  by  Whitgift,  eight  bishops, 
and  ten  learned  divines.  The  king,  who  undertook  to 
act  as  moderator,  did  not  conceal  his  partiality,  and 
replied  to  the  arguments  of  the  Puritans  in  a  tone 
of  offensive  sarcasm.  A  preliminary  meeting  had  been 
held  by  the  king,  the  bishops,  and  five  deans,  with  the 
lords  of  the  Council,  that  the  king  might  receive  ex- 
planation on  sundry  points  in  the  Anglican  use.  On 
four  topics  in  particular  he  sought  instruction,  viz. 
Confirmation,  Absolution,  Lay  Excommunication,  and 
Private  Baptism  by  women.  To  the  last-named  prac- 
tice James  appears  to  have  been  particularly  averse. 
The  conference  really  opened  on  January  16,  and  lasted 
three  daj^s.  The  age  and  infirmities  of  Whitgift  pre- 
vented his  taking  an  active  part,  and  the  chief  spokes- 
man of  the  Church  party  was  Bancroft,  Bishop  of 
London.  The  objections  of  the  Puritans  were  digested 
under    four    heads :    I.    Doctrine ;    II.    Pastors ;    III. 


346  ECCLESIA  ANGLICANA. 

CHAP.      Churcli    Government;    IV.    Eitual   and    Prayer-Book. 

vJ-^-L.  The  nature  of  the  objections  may  be  gathered  from  the 
summary  of  the  "  Millenary  Petition  "  given  above.  It 
appears  unnecessary  to  give  a  detailed  account  of  the 
conference.  The  Puritans  expressed  themselves  satisfied 
with  its  results,  but  probably  only  because  they  le- 
garded   the  present  as   precursors  of  more  important 

its:resuits.  changes.  The  follov^ing  is  an  account  of  the  altera- 
tions sanctioned: — (1.)  "Absolution"  was  defined  by 
the  addition  of  the  words  "or  remission  of  sins." 
(2.)  In  three  cases  the  Lectionary  was  altered  by  the 
substitution  of  portions  of  the  Canonical  Scriptures  for 
portions  of  the  Apocrypha.  (3.)  The  prayer  for  the 
queen  and  royal  family  and  the  corresponding  petition 
in  the  Litany  were  now  introduced,  as  also  the 
thanksgivings  for  rain,  fair  weather,  plenty,  jDcace, 
victory,  and  deliverance  from  plague.  (4.)  Trifling 
alterations  were  made  in  the  text  of  the  Gospels  so 
as  to  adapt  it  to  the  text  of  the  received  translation. 
(5.)  The  rubrics  of  the  Baptismal  Office  were  altered 
so  as  not  to  allow  of  Private  Baptism  being  performed 
by  any  but  a  "  lawful  minister."  (6.)  Confirmation  was 
explained  by  the  definition  "  or  laying  on  of  hands 
on  children  baptized  and  able  to  render  an  account 
of  their  faith  according  to  the  Catechism  following." 
(7.)  In  view,  perhaps,  of  the  Puritan  outcry  for  examina- 
tion of  communicants,  a  really  substantial  innovation 
was  made  by  the  addition  to  the  Catechism  of  the 
section  which  treats  of  the  sacraments.  This  important 
and  valuable  composition  was  the  work  of  Dean  Overall, 
Prolocutor  of  Convocation,  and  afterwards  bishop. 

T'^^^J^yer-      The  new  Prayer-book  was  sanctioned  by  royal  letters. 

1604.  The  proclamation  commands  all  public  officers  to  assist 

the    clergy  in   carrying    out    its   injunctions,  and  ad- 


JAMES  I.  347 

monishes  all  persons  "not  to  expect  any  furtlier  altera-  chap. 
tion  in  the  public  service."  The  sanction  of  Convocation  — .-L. 
was  not  applied  for  until  1662.  This  act  of  royal 
encroachment  was  perhaps  considered  to  be  justified 
by  the  clause  in  Elizabeth's  "  Act  of  Uniformity,"  em- 
powering the  sovereign  to  "  ordain  and  publish  .  .  . 
further  ceremonies  and  rites,"  with  the  advice  of  her 
commissioners,  or  of  the  metropolitan,  in  case  the 
Prayer-book  of  1559  should  be  misused. 

We  have  yet  to  notice  the  connection  between  this  Tiie  Bible  of 

1611 

conference  and  the  English  translation  of  the  Bible  pub- 
lished in  1611.  There  were  at  this  time  at  least  three 
English  Bibles  in  general  use.  (1.)  The  "  Great  Bible," 
which  first  appeared  in  1539,  and  which  was  sometimes 
called  "  Cranmer's  Bible,"  because  including  a  preface 
by  that  prelate.  This  still  survived  in  some  of  the 
churches.  (2.)  The  "Genevan  Bible"  of  1560,  which 
had  obtained  an  immense  circulation.  Eighty  editions 
had  been  published  between  1568  and  1611.  It  was 
undoubtedly  the  best  English  translation  existent.  Its 
renderings,  however,  sometimes  betrayed  the  animus  of 
the  Puritanical  jiarty,  and  this  disqualification  was  still 
more  apparent  in  its  notes.  (3.)  The  "  Bishops'  Bible  " 
of  1568.  This  was  ill  arranged,  and,  as  a  translation, 
was  quite  unworthy  to  cope  with  its  rival  of  Geneva. 
It  had  been  enjoined,  in  1571  and  1587,  that  all  churches 
should  have  copies  of  this  Bible,  but  the  clergy  betrayed 
little  anxiety  about  the  execution  of  such  orders.  At  its  origin 
the  conference  Dr.  Reynolds  censured  certain  mis-  f^i^'^^^ 
translations  in  the  current  versions.  This  led  the  king 
to  express  his  wish  that  one  version  should  be  eveiy- 
where  established,  "to  be  done  by  the  best  learned  in 
both  the  universities ;  after  them  to  be  reviewed  by 
the  bishops  and  the  chief  learned  of  the  Church ;  from 


348  ECCLESIA   AA'GLICANA. 

CHAP,  them  to  be  presented  to  the  Privy  Council ;  and,  lastly, 
— ^_J_,  to  be  ratified  by  his  royal  authority,  and  so  this  whole 
Church  to  be  bound  unto  it  and  none  other."  ^  Ban- 
croft deprecated  the  insertion  of  notes  in  the  new 
version,  and  the  king  admitted  that  he  had  noticed  in 
the  Genevan  Bible  "  some  notes  very  partial,  untrue, 
seditious,  and  savouring  too  much  of  dangerous  and 
traitorous  conceits."  This  was  all  that  was  done  at 
the  conference.  In  July,  1604,  we  find  King  James 
informing  Bancroft  that  he  had  appointed  "  certain 
learned  men,  to  the  number  of  four  and  fifty,  for  the 
translation  of  the  Bible."  Doubtless  many  of  these 
began  their  labours  at  once.  But  it  was  not  until 
1607  that  the  revision  committee  met  in  conference. 
Death  or  resignation  had  then  diminished  their  number 
to  forty-seven.  They  were  divided  into  six  companies, 
two  of  which  met  at  Westminster,  two  at  Oxford,  and 
two  at  Cambridge.  Each  company  had  a  separate 
portion  of  Scripture  allotted  to  it.  Each,  however, 
was  charged  to  send  every  book,  when  revised,  to  the 
other  companies,  "to  be  considered  of  seriously  and 
judiciously."  At  the  completion  of  the  revision  at 
the  three  centres,  two  members  were  chosen  from  each 
company  to  superintend  the  final  preparation  of  the 
work.  The  new  version  came  out  in  1611.  Its  supe- 
riority to  the  other  versions  was  at  once  recognized,  and 
gained  for  it  universal  acceptance.^  The  recent  canon 
giving  legal  status  to  the  "  Bishops'  Bible "  at  once 
became  a  dead  letter.  The  new  version  survived  the 
proposal  to  supersede  it  made  in  the  Long  Parliament 

'  Barton,  Sum  and  Substance  of  the  Conference:  see  Cardwell,  Hist,  of  Con- 
ferences, pp.  187,  188. 

'  It  was  described  as  "  appointed  to  be  read  in  churches."  But  there  is  no  proof 
that  it  was  ever  publicly  sanctioned  by  Convocation,  or  by  Parliament,  or  by  the 
king  in  Council.    "  It  gained  its  currency  partly,  it  may  have  been,  by  the  weight 


JAMES  L  349 

in  April,   1653,  and  has  since  been  accepted  as  "  the      chap. 

XIII 

Bible "  in  all  English-speaking  localities/  It  is  only  — ,_L- 
in  recent  times  that  a  more  extended  research  has  forced 
upon  the  minds  of  scholars  the  necessity  of  producing 
a  more  accurate  translation  for  general  use.  Whatever 
its  failings  as  a  reproduction  of  the  Hebrew  and  Greek 
Scriptures,  the  simplicity  and  rhythmical  beauty  of 
its  diction  will  always  secure  the  version  of  1611  a 
high  place  among  English  classics.  A  comparison 
would  probably  show  that  for  much  of  this  linguistic 
beauty  we  are  indebted  not  so  much  to  the  editors  of 
King  James's  version,  as  to  those  of  the  "  Bishops' 
Bible"  and  its  predecessors.  The  object  of  the  re- 
visionists, says  Dr.  Miles  Smith  in  his  pieface,  was 
not  to  "  make  a  new  translation,  nor  yet  to  make  of 
a  bad  a  good  one,  but  to  make  a  good  one  better,  or 
out  of  many  good  ones  one  principal  good  one."  The 
words  italicized  refer  to  the  "  Bishops'  Bible "  autho- 
rized by  the  Canon  of  1604.^ 

With  the  words  'pro  ecclesid  Dei  on  his  lips,  Arch-  Death  of 
bishop  Whitgift  passed  away  shortly  after  the  close  of 
the  Hampton  Court  Conference.     Whitgift  claims  dis- 
tinction among  the  primates  as  one  who  presided  over 

of  the  king's  name,  partly  by  the  personal  authority  of  the  prelates  and  scholars 
who  had  been  engaged  upon  it,  but  still  more  by  its  own  intrinsic  superiority  over 
its  rivals." — Westcott,  History  of  the  English  Bible,  p.  158.  The  "  Bishops'  Bible  " 
is,  strictly  speaking,  still  the  only  "  Authorized  Version  "  of  our  Church,  though  this 
term  is  often  misapplied  to  the  version  of  1611. 

'  The  following  are  the  most  celebratad  translations  of  the  Bible  : — Wyclifs  New 
Testament,  cir.  1380  ;  Old  Testament,  cir.  1383  ;  Turvey's  (a  revision  of  Wyclifs), 
1388;  Tyndale's  i>rinted  New  Testament,  1525,  and  Pent^iteuch,  1530 ;  Coverdale's 
Bible,  1535;  Matthew's  Bible  (a  compilation  from  Tyndale's  and  Coverdale's  by 
Matthew  Rogers),  1537  ;  the  Great  Bible  (a  revision  of  Matthew's  by  Coverdale), 
1539  ;  Taverner's  (also  a  revision  of  Matthew's),  1539  ;  the  Genevan  Bible  (by 
Whittingham  and  other  refugees),  1560 ;  the  Bishops'  Bible  (by  Archbishop 
Parker's  committee),  1568;  the  Douay  Bible  (a  reproduction  of  Jerome  from  the 
Vulgate),  1609-10;  the  so-called  authorized  version  by  King  James's  translators, 
1611.  To  these  we  may  now  add  the  revision  of  the  New  Testament  of  1611  issued 
in  May,  1881. 


350  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

our  Church  at  a  critical  period,  and  by  his  energy  and 
courage  purged  her  of  abuses  within,  and  protected 
her  from  hostility  from  without.  He  has  been  unjustly 
branded  with  the  character  of  a  bigoted  persecutor  on 
account  of  the  severe  suppression  of  the  sectarian 
party  during  his  primacy.  Those  who  bear  in  mind 
the  dangers  with  which  this  party  menaced  the  con- 
stitution, the  dastardly  expedients  to  which  they  had 
recourse  in  their  attempt  to  spread  their  tenets,  and, 
above  all,  the  clemency  with  which  Whitgift  ever  treated 
a  fallen  foe,  will  regard  him  in  another  light.  In  the 
words  of  Mr.  Perry,  "  to  Whitgift  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land owes,  under  God,  the  pieservation  of  its  order 
and  discipline,  and  the  rescue  of  its  property  from  the 
covetous  grasp  of  the  queen  and  courtiers."  ^  This  is 
a  fair  epitome  of  his  work,  nor  can  we  find  any  graver 
disqualification  in  this  primate  than  an  excusable  want 
of  theological  attainment. 
Bancroft  Against  Bancroft,  his  successor  at  Canterbury,  may 

Ajciibishop  i^Q  levelled  with  more  reason  those  accusations  of  bip;oted 

of  Canter-  <^ 

biiry.  zeal  for  conformity  with  which  Puritan  writers  have  en- 

Dec.  1640.  . 

deavoured  to  assail  the  fame  of  Whitgift.    Bancroft  was 

a  man  of  warmer  temperament,  and  he  was  nominated 
by  James,  who  now  made  no  secret  of  his  hostility  to 
the  Puritans,  for  the  express  purpose  of  suppressing 
nonconformity  with  a  high  hand.  Clergymen  who 
had  already  subscribed  Whitgift's  three  Articles  of  con- 
formity were  compelled  to  subscribe  them  again,  then 
to  sign  a  declaration  that  they  subscribed  willingly 
The  ex-       and  ex  animo.     Those  who  refused  this  test  of  their 

animotest.  ...  ,•      n      •      ,i 

purpose  m  signing  were  practically  m  the  same  position 
as  those  who  refused  conformity  altogether,  save  that 
they  were  allowed  time  to  change  their  minds.     These 

'  Student's  English  Church  History,  p.  364. 


JAMES  L  351 

precautions  against  insincerity  ousted  several  clergy-      chap. 

XIII 

men  from,  their  preferments.  According  to  Bancroft  — — ^ 
himself,  the  number  amounted  to  forty-nine,  but  the 
computation  of  Puritan  writers  raises  it  to  three 
hundred.  Before  the  installation  of  Bancroft  the  way 
was  paved  for  this  stringent  policy  by  Convocation's 
acceptance  of  the  important  code  known  as  the  Canons 
of  1604. 

These  Canons,  though  fallen  into  desuetude,  are  legally  The  canons 
still  binding  on  the  clergy,  and  morally  on  all  professed  ° 
Churchmen.  They  are  one  hundred  and  sixty-one  in 
number,  and  are  divided  into  thirteen  chapters.  The 
first  chapter  inveighs  against  the  Puritans,  and  declares 
all  who  affirm  that  the  English  Church  is  not  a  part 
of  the  true  and  Apostolic  Church  to  be  %'pso  facto  ex- 
communicated. In  Chapter  II.,  which  treats  of  Divine 
Worship,  the  use  of  the  cross  at  Baptism,  concerning 
which  the  Puritans  were  scrupulous,  is  defended  in  a 
lengthy  argument.  In  the  same  chapter  occur  Canons 
prescribing  that  the  Litany  be  used  on  Wednesdays 
and  Fridays;  that  all  make  lowly  reverence  at  the 
name  of  Jesus ;  that  Holy  Communion  be  received 
three  times  a  year  at  the  least ;  and  that  copes  be  used 
in  cathedral  churches.  In  the  third  chapter,  that  on 
Ministers,  occurs  the  order  that  Whitgift's  three  Articles 
are  to  be  subscribed  ex  animo  by  all  who  are  ordained, 
admitted,  or  licensed.  It  will  be  sufficient  to  enumerate 
the  titles  of  the  remaining  chapters.  Chapter  IV. 
treats  of  Sclioolmasters ;  Chapter  V.  of  the  Decent  Fittings 
and  Ornaments  of  Churches  and  their  Repair  ;  Chapter  VI. 
of  Churchwardens  and  Parish  Clerks;  Chapters  VII.  to  XII. 
of  Ecclesiastical  Courts;  and  Chapter  XIII.  of  Synods. 
The  Canons  were  compiled  by  Bancroft  himself,  from 
earlier  sources.     After  being  accepted  by  the  Convoca- 


352 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


CHAP. 

xiir. 


The 

Puritan 
contro- 
versy. 


Folly  of 

Bancroft's 

conduct. 


tion  of  Canterbury,  they  were  declared  binding  on  the 
northern  province  by  royal  letters  patent.  The  Con- 
vocation of  York  thereupon  asserted  its  claim  to  make 
its  own  Canons.  The  claim  was  allowed,  and  the  Canons 
were  properly  passed  in  the  Northern  Convocation. 
Though  sanctioned  by  the  king,  the  Canons  were  never 
ratified  by  Parliament.  Legally,  therefore,  they  are 
only  binding  on  the  laity  where  they  are  declaiatory 
of  previous  statutes. 

The  effect  of  Bancroft's  rigour  was  to  widen  the  gulf 
between  the  High  and  Low  Church  parties.  Early  in 
1605  there  appeared  a  Puritan  treatise,  entitled  the 
"  Abridgment  of  the  Lincoln  Ministers,"  in  which  the 
ceremonies  of  the  Church  were  regarded  not  meiely  as 
objectionable,  but  as  sinful.  The  catalogue  of  alleged 
abuses  in  the  Church  appended  to  the  "Abridgment" 
is  much  larger  than  that  in  the  "  Millenar}'  Petition." 
Morton,  afterwards  Bishop  of  Chester,  answered  the 
"  Abridgment "  in  a  feeble  treatise,  called  the  "  Defence 
of  the  Three  Ceremonies."  The  three  ceremonies  were 
those  which  were  the  special  grievances  of  the  Puritans, 
viz.  kneeling  at  Holy  Communion,  wearing  the  surplice, 
and  using  the  sign  of  the  cross  at  Baptism. 

The  policy  of  Archbishop  Bancroft  was  so  far 
crowned  with  success  that  non-conformity  was  driven 
into  concealment,  and  many  Puritan  clergy  sought  the 
company  of  the  Brownists  in  Holland,  and  there  devoted 
themselves  to  religious  jangling  and  mutual  excom- 
munications. It  has  often  been  said  that  the  primate's 
conduct  was  -unconstitutional.  It  must  be  remembered, 
however,  that  it  had  the  sanction  of  the  Star  Chamber 
Court,  and  that  this  warrant  was  in  those  days  legally 
sufficient.  Injudicious,  however,  it  certainly  was.  The 
exaltation  of  the  royal  prerogative  by  the  enforcement 


JAMES  I.  353 

of  a  test  unsanctioned  by  Parliament  alienated  from      chap 


xui. 


the  Anglican  system  many  to  whom  the  personal 
liberty  of  the  subject  was  more  dear  than  religious 
uniformity.  It  has  been  well  observed  that  in  the 
limitations  of  civil  and  religious  liberty  to  which  the 
prelates  of  James's  reign  lent  their  sanction  lies  the  ex- 
planation of  that  strange  coalition  of  educated  gentle- 
men and  fanatical  Puritans  which,  formed  the  nucleus 
of  the  Great  Eebellion.  Even  in  Elizabeth's  reign  the 
judges  had  shown  much  jealousy  of  the  bishops,  and  had 
used  prohibitions  to  stay  such  suits  in  the  ecclesiastical 
courts  as  they  regarded  as  falling  under  their  own 
cognizance.  In  the  present  reign  the  collisions  between 
the  secular  and  ecclesiastical  tribunals  were  con- 
tinual. In  the  Parliament  of  1610  the  High  Com- 
mission Court  was  so  violently  denounced  that  the 
House  received  a  rebuke  from  James  himself.  The  The 
argument  of  the  courtier  prelates  was  that,  the  judges  theory, 
being  only  delegates  of  the  king,  he  could  take  causes 
out  of  their  hands,  and  transfer  cognizance  of  them  to 
such  tribunals  as  the  Court  of  High  Commission. 
Having  a  sovereign  favourable  to  the  Church,  they 
pressed  the  theory  that  the  king  could  do  no  wrong, 
and  that  Parliament  met  not  of  right,  but  by  the  royal 
sufferance.  So  plainly  were  these  doctrines  expressed 
in  Dr.  Cowell's  "  Interpreter,"  that,  notwithstanding 
James's  recent  admonition,  the  Houses  determined  to 
protect  themselves  by  active  measures.  They  accord- 
ing proceeded  to  imprison  the  author  and  suppress  the 
work  by  proclamation. 

The  Romanists  were  exposed,  in  this  reign,  to  the  suppres- 
same  rigour  as  the  Puritans,  but  with  more  show  of  ^"^^^^g^g 
justice.     A  plot  had  been  discovered,  shortly  after  the 
king's  accession,  which  was  held  to  justify  the  proclama- 

2  A 


354 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


CHAP,  tions  and  raiiiamentary  enactments  for  the  banishment 
■  ^^l\  of  Roman  priests  and  Jesuits  published  in  1604.  Driven 
to  desi^eration,  the  ^dctims  of  these  severities  conceived 
the  iniquitous  scheme  commonly  known  as  the  Gun- 
powder Plot  (1605).  Four  Jesuits,  named  Green  way, 
Gerard,  Garnet,  and  Oldcarr,  were  implicated  in  this 
.  conspiracy.  The  two  last  named  suffered  the  fearful 
penalties  of  high  treason. 

The  plot  inspired  the  country  with  a  lively  detesta- 
tion of  Eomanism,  and  this  form  of  Christianity  was 
henceforth  persecuted  under  the  severe  statutes  passed 
in  the  session  of  1605-6.  It  is  melancholy  to  relate 
that  a  sacramental  test  was  now  introduced  as  a  means 
of  enfoicing  conformity.  The  statutes  referred  to  re- 
quired suspected  persons  to  receive  the  Sacrament 
according  to  the  Anglican  use  at  least  once  a  year, 
under  pain  of  fines,  extending  to  the  forfeiture  of  two- 
thirds  of  their  incomes.  They  were  also  required  to 
take  the  oath  of  allegiance  renouncing  the  temporal 
power  of  the  Pope  in  England,  under  j)ain  of  incur ling 
a  prcemunire.  The  recusants  were  also  disqualified  from 
holding  office  or  practising  any  profession.  These 
severities  gave  rise  to  a  controversy  between  the  divines 
of  the  two  Churches.  James,  to  whom  theological 
disputation  was  the  crowning  joy  of  life,  took  the  lead 
by  publishing  an  "  Apology  for  the  Oath  of  Allegiance." 
To  this  Persons  and  Bellarmine  replied.  A  wordy 
warfare  ensued,  the  details  of  which  need  not  be  par- 
ticularized. 
Restora-  The  king's  interest  in  Church  matters  was  expressed 

episcopacy  ^^  ^  more  Commendable  manner  by  an  attempt  to  re- 
iand.°^        establish  Catholic  organization  in  Scotland.     The  first 
step  towards  bringing  the  distracted  religionists  of  the 
north  into  conformity  with  the  Church  would  neces- 


JAMES  I.  355 

sarily  be  a  restoration  of  episcopacy*     For  this  the  way      chap. 
was  to  some  extent  prepared,  for  titular  bishops  had     ^^!^ 
been  appointed  to  the  ancient  sees,  and  in  1606   the 
Scotch  Parliament  had  granted  to  these  functionaries 
the  temporalities  of  their  episcopates.     The  king  urged 
the  Presbyterian  divines  to  suffer  the  nominal  episcopate 
to  be  converted  into  a   properly  consecrated  order  of 
bishops      After  much  pressure,    the   northern   divines 
agreed   to  put   the   bishops   in   the  position  of  "  con- 
stant moderators "   of  the  Church  assemblies,    and  to 
give  them  the  power  of  excommunicating,  inducting, 
and  depriving  ministers.     Oaths  of  obedience  to  them 
were  to  be  taken  by  those  appointed  to  benefices.     The 
way  was  now  prepared  for  giving  these  officers  their 
true    ecclesiastical    status    by    consecrating    them    as 
bishops.     Spotswood    Archbishop    of    Glasgow,    Lamb 
Bishop  of  Brechin,  and  Hamilton  Bishop  of  Galloway, 
were  accordingly  invited  to  England  to  be  consecrated. 
By  a  remarkable  exercise  of  discretion,  the  three  were 
raised  to  the  episcopate  "per  saltum,  without  being  re-  Oct.  leio. 
quired  to  pass  through  the  intervening  grades  of  deacon 
and  priest.   In  justification  of  this,  Bancroft  had  adduced 
from  the  early  ages  the  cases  of  Ambrose,  and  others  who 
had  been  raised  to  the  episcopate  from  the  lay  estate. 
In   the   same   spirit   of  discretion  it  was  agreed  that 
neither  of  the  English   archbishops   should  take  part 
in   the    consecration,^   lest    the   proceeding   should    be 
misconstrued  by  the  Scotch,  as  designed  to  reduce  their 
Church  to  subservience.     It  only  remained  that  con- 
formity of  worship  should  be  established  in  the  northern 
Church   by   the   introduction   of  a   Book   of  Common 
Prayer.     The   General  Assembly  at  Perth  voted   that  -^d.  leis. 
such  a  work  shouLl  be  prepared.     National  prejudices 

'  J  he  Bishops  of  London,  Ely,  Rochester,  and  Worcester  oflficiated. 


356 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


CHAP,  forbade  the  introduction  of  the  English  Prayer-book, 
.  ^™V .  but  the  five  Articles  agreed  to  at  this  assembly  gave 
promise  that  the  Scotch  use  would  be  based  on  the 
same  lines  as  that  of  England.  These  Articles  (1)  en- 
joined kneeling  at  the  Sacrament  of  the  Lord's  Supper ; 
(2)  allowed  private  communion  in  case  of  sickness ;  (3) 
permitted  private  baptism  in  cases  of  emergency;  (4) 
ordered  the  exercise  of  catechizings  and  confirmations ; 
and  (5)  enjoined  that  holy  days  and  festivals  should  be 
duly  observed.  The  service  book  which  the  Scotch 
bishops  afterwards  drew  up  was  approved  of  by  King 
James,  but  he  considered  that  it  would  be  impolitic  to 
introduce  it  until  the  nation  was  more  prepared  for 
the  innovation.  This  matter  was  accordingly  deferred. 
Throughout  this  enterprise  it  must  be  admitted  that 
James  exhibited  singular  wisdom.  His  conduct  con- 
trasts forcibly  with  that  of  his  successor,  whose  pre- 
cipitate endeavour  to  bring  the  Scotch  Church  into 
closer  conformity  resulted  in  the  "  extirpation  of 
prelacy"  by  the  instrument  termed  the  "  Solemn  League 
and  Covenant."  In  the  distracted  period  which  ensued 
the  episcopal  succession  was  lost.  It  was  restored  by 
the  agency  of  the  English  hierarchy  in  1661. 

Bancroft  died  in  November,  1610.     The  most  popular 
divine  and  eloquent  preacher  in  the  English  Church  at 
this  time  was  Bishop  Andrewes.     It  was  commonly  sup- 
posed that  he  would  be  appointed  as  Bancroft's  suc- 
Abbot         cesser.     The  kin2:'s  vanity  led  him  to  confer  the  vacant 

Archbishop         .  . 

oi  Canter-  primacy  on  a  man  of  a  very  different  stamp,  Dr.  George 
Abbot,  formerly  Master  of  TJniversit}'  College,  Oxford, 
and  recently  made  Bishop  of  London.  Abbot  was  a 
sour  bigot  of  Calvinistic  principles.  He  had  had  little 
or  no  experience  of  pastoral  work  of  any  kind.  But 
in  a  preface  to  a  book   he  had  described  the  king  as 


JAMES  I.  357 

"  zealous  as  David,  learned  as  Solomon,  religious  as 
Josias,"  and  so  forth..  Hence  his  promotion  to  the 
highest  place  in  the  English  Church.  The  one  satis- 
factory incident  in  Abbot's  primacy  was  his  courageous 
refusal  to  divorce  Lady  Francis  Howard  from  the  Earl 
of  Essex,  that  she  might  marry  the  king's  dissolute 
favourite,  Lord  Rochester,  a  refusal  which  impaired  his 
influence  with  the  king  till  the  end  of  the  reign.  The 
new  primate  undid  the  disciplinary  work  of  Bancroft 
and  Whitgift  by  giving  encouragement  to  the  Puritan 
irregularities  of  practice.  On  the  other  hand,  he  was 
as  intolerant  of  error  in  religious  opinion  as  Calvin 
himself.  This  primacy  is  disgracefully  memorable  as 
an  era  of  persecution,  for  Abbot  revived  the  hateful  Two 
policy  of  the  Marian  times  by  encouraging  the  king  to  biimt. 
punish  heresy  with  death.  James,  cruel  by  nature,  lent 
a  ready  ear  to  the  gloomy  Calvinist.  To  the  conster- 
nation of  his  subjects,  he  issued  a  writ  de  Jiaeretico  com- 
hurendo  to  exterminate  an  ignorant  Unitarian,  named 
Bartholomew  Legate,  whom  he  had  failed  to  confute 
by  argument.  This  execution  was  shortly  followed  by  March  and 
another  at  Lichfield,  the  victim  beino;  Edward  Wight-  -^p"^' ^^^^^ 
man.  The  capital  punishment  of  heretics  as  such  had 
been  unknown  for  nearly  thirty  years ;  for  Elizabeth's 
victims  had  mostly  suffered  as  traitors,  not  for  their 
religious  opinions.  Great  indignation  was  therefore 
excited  by  these  cruelties.  The  king  did  not  dare 
again  inflict  capital  punishment  for  religious  error, 
but  contented  himself  with  consigning  such  offenders 
to  perpetual  imprisonment. 

The  Church  was   n(jw  hopelessly  committed  to  the  Tue 
cause  of  arbitrary  government,  and  was  incurring  such  and  °^^ 
odium  that  patriotism  and  Puritanism  gradually  became  ^rfncr^ie* 
synonymous.     The  political  attitude  of  the  prelates  of 


358 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


CHAP. 
XIII. 


this  period  was  a  natural  consequence  of  the  Eeformation 
settlement.     The  bishops,  who  in  former  ages  had  been 
the   champions  of  liberty  and   the  vindicators  of  the 
rights  of  the  people,  were  now  entirely  dependent  on 
the  Crown.     In  too  many  cases  promotion  was  secured 
by  truckling,  and  the   favoured   ecclesiastic  kept  his 
footing  at  court  by  arguing  from  the  pulpit  and  in  the 
House  of  Lords  in  behalf  of  absolute  monarchy.     The 
Commons  were  not  slow  to  express  their  intolerance  of 
such  doctrines,  and  the  divine  right  of  kings  frequently 
received  scant  consideration  from  the  judges.     Neill, 
Bishop  of  London,  who  had  argued  before  the  Lords 
in  favour  of  "  impositions  "  as  a  royal  privilege,  was  com- 
pelled to  apologize  humbly  before   the  Lower  House. 
The  king's  unrighteous  claim  to  grant  commendams  to 
his    episcopal    favourites    (i.e.,    to   give    them   sujDple- 
mentary  pieces  of  preferment  to  be  held  in  commendam 
with  their  sees)  was  the  subject  of  a  suit  which  came 
before  Sir  Edward  Coke.     The  judge  incurred  suspen- 
sion and  dismissal  rather  than  unjustly  quash  the  trial 
in  deference  to  James's  mandate.     How  unworthy  of 
their   high   office  were   some   of  James's    bishops  was 
shown   in   the   celebrated  case  of  Lady  Ejsscx.     Two 
bishops  were  found  who  were  ready  to  pronounce  the 
sentence  of  divorce  refused  b}^  Abbot.     On   the  lower 
clergy  lay  the  double  burden  of  oppression  from  their 
cieri^^"°^  bishops,  and  increasing  unpopularity  with  the  political 
reformers.     Political  independence  was  for  them   im- 
possible, and  they  were  compelled  to  bear  the  odium  of 
a  despotism  which  pressed,  probably,  more  severely  on 
them  than  others.     The  poverty  of  the  clergy  was  such 
as  to  degrade  them  to  the  social  level  of  small  tradesmen 
and   gentlemen's  servants.     What   protection  they  re- 
ceived from  the  State  may  be  guessed  from  the  case  of 


Unfortu- 
nate 
position  of 


JAMES  I.  359 

the  Eev.  E.  Peacham,  a  Somersetshire  rector.  Peacham  chap. 
had  refused  to  contribute  to  a  "  benevolence  "  demanded  .  '^"^'  ■ 
of  the  clergy.  He  was  put  in  prison  on  suspicion,  and 
when  his  house  was  searched,  a  sermon  alleged  to  be  of 
a  treasonable  character  was  found  there.  The  wretched 
man  was  examined  under  torture,  and  was  condemned 
to  be  hanged,  drawn,  and  quartered,  though  the  sermon 
had  never  been  preached.  He  escaped  the  execution  of 
this  sentence  by  dying  in  prison. 

The  king  was,  as  we  have  shown,  in  most  respects  The  king's 
opposed  to  the  Puritan  party.  He  was  especially  averse  sports." 
to  their  Sabbatarian  notions,  and  himself  published  a  ^'^'  ^^^^' 
"  Book  of  Sports "  for  Sunday  afternoons.  Trask,  a 
Puritan  minister  who  ventured  to  defend  the  Sabba- 
tarian opinions  of  his  party,  was  promptly  set  in  the 
pillory,  and  thence  whipped  to  the  Fleet.  Of  Calvinism, 
on  the  other  hand,  the  royal  eclectic  was,  for  a  time  at 
least,  a  vehement  supporter.  When  the  Synod  of  Dort 
was  convened  in  1618,  to  settle  the  dispute  between  the 
Calvinists  and  the  Arminians,  James,  on  his  own 
responsibility,  sent  delegates  like-minded  with  him- 
self. The  persons  sent  were  Carleton,  Bishop  of  Llan- 
daff;  Hall,  afterwards  Bishop  of  Exeter;  Ward  and 
Davenant,  heads  of  colleges  in  Cambridge ;  and,  to 
represent  the  Scotch  Church,  Balcanqual,  fellow  of 
Pembroke  Hall.  The  discussion,  which  resulted  in  the 
defeat  of  the  Arminians,  bore  on  the  five  prominent 
"  points "  of  Calvinism,  and  is  therefore  known  as  the 
Quinquarticular  controversy.  The  five  Calvinistic  de- 
grees were  these — (1)  Predestination  of  some  to  life 
eternal  and  others  to  damnation;  (2)  Particular  Ee- 
demption,  i.e.  the  theory  that  Christ  died  only  for  a 
chosen  few ;  (3)  Original  Sin,  as  involving  the  total 
corruption  of  human  nature ;  (4)  Irresistible  Grace,  or 


36o 


ECCLESIA    ANGLICANA. 


CHAP. 
XIII. 


The  kingrt 
turns  on 
the 

Calvinists, 


the  theory  that  divine  grace  overpowers  the  free-will 
of  God's  chosen ;  (5)  Final  Perseverance  of  all  who 
are  converted. 

A  few  years  later,  political  considerations  induced 
the  king  to  modify  his  Calvinism,  to  show  indulgence 
to  the  Arminian  platform,  and  even  to  extend  tolera- 
tion to  the  Eomanists.  It  was  now  ordered  that  no 
preacher,  under  the  rank  of  bishop  or  dean,  should 
discuss  the  subjects  of  predestination,  election,  and 
divine  grace.  None  was  to  rail  from  the  pulpit  against 
Puritans  and  papists.  A  proclamation  was  issued 
ordering  the  release  of  such  Eoman  recusants  as  were 
confined  in  prison.  The  secret  of  this  change  was  that 
James  was  bent  on  effecting  a  marriage  between  Prince 
Charles  and  the  Infanta  of  Spain,  and  desired  the  good 
opinion  of  the  Eoman  Catholics  abroad.  The  residence 
of  a  Eoman  bishop  in  partihus  was  actually  sanctioned. 
This  concession  was  as  uncalled  for  by  the  Papists,  as 
it  was  offensive  to  Anglicans,  since  the  Jesuits,  from 
esprit  de  corps,  preferred  the  rule  of  their  own  arch- 
priest.  Great  excitement  was  caused  by  the  change  of 
policy,  and  Archbishop  Abbot  addressed  a  warm  remon- 
strance to  the  king  for  thus  "  labouring  to  set  up  the 
most  damnable  and  heretical  doctrine  of  the  Church  of 
Eome."  Much  to  the  satisfaction  of  the  nation,  the 
Spanish  match  was  broken  off.  Scarcely  less  unpopular, 
however,  was  the  prince's  subsequent  engagement  to 
another  Eomanist  lady,  Henrietta  of  France. 

King  James  died  on  March  27,  1625.  Though  really 
attached  to  the  Church  of  England,  his  influence  had 
been  generally  detrimental  to  her  interests.  In  the 
character  of  supreme  governor  of  the  Church  he  had 
persecuted,  from  time  to  time,  almost  all  forms  of 
religious  opinion.     By  filling  the  episcopate  with  the 


JAMES  I.  361 

pnrtizans   of   absolutism   lie   had    alienated    from   the      chap. 

XIII 

Church  the  sympathies  of  patriotic  citizens.     He  had     < — ,_L. 
allowed   his    favourites   and    flatterers    to    accumulate 
pluralities,  while  nothing  was  done  to  raise  the  inferior 
clergy  from  a  condition  of  abject  poverty.     His  unfor- 
tunate appointment  of  Abbot  to  the  primacy  has  been 
sufficiently    noticed.      Great    excitement    was    caused  Lord 
among    the  lawyers   by   James's   promotion   of  Dean  -w-miams. 
Williams  to  the  office  of  lord  keeper,  now  usually  filled  ^'^'  ^^^^' 
by  a  layman,  and  vacated  by  the  fall  of  the  great  Lord 
Bacon.      Williams,    however,    proved    himself    better 
qualified  to  fill  the  office  of  lord  keeper  than  to  bear 
that  load  of  clerical   honours  which   made  him  what 
Heylin  calls  "  a  perfect  diocese  in  himself."     Not  con-  His 
tent  with  receiving  the  bishopric  of  Lincoln,  Williams  oust  Abbot 
coveted  the  primacy,   and  sought  to  bring  about  the  primacy, 
downfall   of  Archbishop  Abbot    in   rather  a   singular 
manner.     The  archbishop  had  accidentally  shot  one  of 
his  keepers  with   his  cross-bow,  and  Williams  urged 
that  the  homicide  constituted  an  irregularity  and  con- 
sequent unfitness  for  the  primacy.     It   was   in   great 
measure  owing  to  the  advocacy  of  Bishop  Andrewes 
that  Abbot  escaped  deposition  on  this  singular  charge. 


362 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


CHAPTEE  XIV. 

A.D.  1625-1649. 


A  political  reformation  imminent — The  ecclesiastics  are  pledged  to  conservatism 
— Dread  of  Romanism — Charles's  ecclesiastical  policy — Laud  practically  primate 
— Dr.  Mouutague's  writings — Abbot  now  opposed  to  absolutism — Subservient 
attitude  of  Mainwaring  and  other  divines — The  "  Declaration  "  attached  to  the 
Articles — Intolerance  of  the  Commons — The  "Vow"  voted — Suspension  of 
Parliament — Laud  and  Strafford — Courts  of  High  Commission  and  Star  Chamber 
— Severities  of  Star  Chamber  exaggerated— Laud  not  responsible  for  these — But 
for  the  religious  alterations — Laud's  reformation  of  abuses — Laud  protects  the 
Holy  Tables  from  desecration — And  discountenances  extemporary  prayers  and 
slovenly  services — Laud  falsely  charged  with  Romanist  opinions — Laud  requires 
the  foreign  refugees  to  conform— The  Sabbatarian  controversy — Arbitrary  pro- 
ceedings on  both  sides — The  war  with  Scotland — Provoked  by  precipitate  religious 
changes — The  Stony  Sabbath — The  Solemn  League  and  Covenant— The  Short 
Parliament — The  Convocation— The  Puritans  talie  exception  to  the  sixth  Canon 
— The  Long  Parliament — Its  attack  on  the  High  Church  clergy — The  visitation 
of  churches — The  Committee  of  Religion — Assault  on  episcopacy — The  spiritual 
lords  are  miibbed — And  imprisoned — Inconsistency  of  King  Charles — The  civil 
war — The  "  Root  and  Branch  Bill" — The  Covenant  accepted  by  the  Commons — 
And  by  the  Westminster  Assembly — And  enforced  on  all  adults— The  Directory 
of  Public  Worship— Use  of  the  Prayer-book  proscribed — The  Presbyterian  system 
— Dissolution  of  the  AVestminster  Assembly — Archbishop  Laud  unfairly  tried — 
And  done  to  death — Charles  refuses  to  sacrifice  the  Church — And  is  executed — 
The  persecution  of  the  Church — The  Committees  for  Scandalous  Ministers — The 
Committee  for  Plundered  Ministers — The  Covenant  forced  upon  the  clergy — 
Terrible  sufferings  of  the  clergy — Fate  of  the  bishops— Of  the  churches — Of  the 
universities. 

Apolitical  LoNG  before  the  reign  of  James,  men  had  perceived 

tion  that  absolutism  was  out  of  date,  and  that  it  was  time 

for  Parliament  to  take  the  place  of  the  royal  Council. 

The  insurrection  of  the  Lollard  socialists,  the  Wars  of 

the  Roses,  the  reigns  of  the  strong-willed  Tudors,  the 


CHARLES  L  3^3 

Eeformation  with  its  transfer  of  papal  prerogatives  to 
the  sovereign,  had  all  conduced  to  defer  the  day  of 
political  reform.  Before  the  end  of  Elizabeth's  reign, 
those  theories  of  personal  liberty  which  had  been 
germinating  since  the  time  of  Magna  Charta,  had 
sufficiently  ripened  to  augur  a  speed}^  alteration  in  the 
system  of  government.  James  endeavoured  to  prop  up 
the  tottering  structure  of  autocracy  by  means  of  the 
Church.  The  bishops  were  to  be  backed  up  against 
the  Puritans  on  condition  they  guarded  the  throne 
against  the  encroachments  of  Parliament.  In  return  The 
for  enjoying  the  rule  of  a  good  Churchman  the  clergy  tics  are 
were  to  preach  the  divine  right  of  kings.  The  natural  conserva-° 
result  of  this  alliance  was  that  the  Commons  coquetted  *^^"^" 
with  the  sects,  and  at  last  became  Puritanical  on 
political  grounds,  this  semblance  of  Puritanism  be- 
coming more  and  more  a  real  sectarian  animus  as  the 
Church  waned  in  popularity.  A  collision,  in  which 
Church  and  throne  would  share  one  fate,  could  only 
have  been  averted  by  the  accession  of  a  consummate 
diplomatist  such  as  Elizabeth,  or  the  promotion  of  a 
patriot  primate  such  as  Becket.  Neither  of  these  con- 
tingencies occurred.  The  successor  to  James  was  a  man 
of  amiable  disposition  and  virtuous  life,  but  utterly 
devoid  of  political  ability,  and  educated  in  a  belief 
that  the  English  sovereign  reigned  as  God's  sole  vice- 
gerent like  a  king  in  ancient  Israel.  The  administra- 
tion of  the  Church  full  into  the  hands  of  a  prelate 
whose  many  talents  were  made  subsidiary  to  the  cause 
of  absolutism.  The  fated  transition  was  accordingly 
inaugurated  by  a  rebellion,  in  which  the  principles  of 
the  Church  were  proscribed,  her  clergy  persecuted  with 
fearful  severity,  and  her  temples  wrecked  by  spiteful 
and  triumphant  fanatics. 


364  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

CHAP.  The  reign  opened  badly  with  the  marriage  of  Charles 

s — _L.  to  an  uncompromising  Eomanist,  Henrietta  Maria  of 
France,  and  the  consequent  importation  of  a  retinue  of 
foreign  priests,  whose  presence  aggrieved  the  Puritans, 
and  was  a  violation  of  the  statutes  against  recusants. 
A  secret  engagement  had  been  made  at  the  close  of  the 
last  reign  between  James,  Charles,  and  the  Pope,  that 
this  alliance  should  bring  concessions  to  the  Eomanists 
Dread  of      in  England.     But  the  nation  was  in  no  mood  to  ffrant 

Eomanisni.  ^ 

such  indulgences.  The  Commons  consisted  of  men 
who  hated  popery,  and  were  learniug  to  distrust  pre- 

Juiys.  lacy.  It  presented  to  the  king  a  pious  petition,  praying 
for  the  execution  of  the  laws  against  Roman  mis- 
sionaries and  recusants.    Charles  endeavoured  to  satisfy 

Dec.  15.  the  petitioners  by  issuing  royal  letters  to  the  arch- 
bishops, requiring  them  to  neglect  no  good  means  "  for 
finding  out  and  apprehending  of  Jesuits  and  seminary 
priests,  and  other  seducers  of  his  people  to  the  Romish 
religion,  or  for  repressing  popish  recusants."  But  these 
letters  he  practically  cancelled  by  secret  dispensations. 

Charles's         In  his  thcological  opiuious  Charles  was  quite  unlike 

caipoiicT  ^^^  father.  He  was  a  pronounced  and  consistent 
Churchman,  zealous  in  the  interests  of  Anglicanism,  but 
without  intellectual  ability  to  tolerate  other  systems, 
least  of  all  the  Calvinistic  school  now  popular  among 
the  English  laity.  Abbot  had  lost  favour  at  court 
before  the  death  of  James.  After  Charles's  accession 
he  was  practically  no  longer  primate.  The  pluralist 
Williams  was  equally  out  of  favour.  He  had  fostered 
the  popular  hostility  against  Buckingham,  and  had 
taken  part  in  intrigues  discreditable  to  his  clerical 
profession.  He  was  deprived  of  the  Great  Seal,  and 
sank  into  obscurity.  He  was  subsequently  tried  for 
subornation  of  perjury,  fined  £10,000,  and  imprisoned. 


CHARLES  I.  365 

Andre wes,  in  all  respects  tlie  most  distinguished  divine      chap. 
of  his   day,    was   probably   too   moderate   a   man    for     v_Jl^ 
Charles.     From  the  first  the  snn  of  royal  favour  shone  Laud 
full  on  William  Laud,  Bishop  of  S.  David's.     Laud  had  primate.  ^ 
been  j)i'esident  of  S.  John's  College,  Oxford,  chaplain 
to  King  James,  and  Dean  of  Gloucester.     He  became  a 
bishop  in  1621.     He  was  regarded  with  real  affection 
by  Buckingham,  but  seems  not  to  have  been  much  in 
favour  with  James.    With  the  public  he  was  unpopular, 
as   havins:   been    involved   in    the   secret   scheme    for 
marrying   Charles  to   the   Infanta.     Charles   had   for 
some  time  honoured  him  with  his  intimacy.     Hence- 
forth   in    matters    ecclesiastical    he   was    paramount. 
Laud  was  appointed  to  act  as  dean  at  the  coronation. 
The  ceremonial  employed  on  this  occasion  w^as  offensive 
to  the  Puritans,  and  was  subsequently  alluded  to  by 
Prynne  in  his  indictment  of  Laud.      A  crucifix  was 
displayed  on   the   altar,   and   an    ancient   prayer   was 
resuscitated  to  illustrate  the  sacred  character  of  the 
sovereign's    office.      Before    the    coronation,    Charles, 
ignoring   the   authority   of    the   Primate   Abbot,    had 
directed  Laud   to  consult  with  Andrewes   about   the 
business   of    Convocation.      Here   Laud's   impetuosity 
and  want  of  discretion  had  been  sufficiently  displayed, 
for  he  had  counselled  that  the  burning  questions  of  the 
Synod  of  Dort  should  be  brought  forward,  and   the 
Calvinistic   formularies   be    rejected    by    Convocation. 
The  influence  of  Andrewes  prevented  this  injudicious 
proceeding. 

The  temper  of  the  nation  at  this  time  would  have 
taxed  the  abilities  of  wiser  rulers  than  Charles.  The 
deference  of  the  bishops  to  absolutist  policy  and  the 
revived  dread  of  Romanism  had  excited  such  sj-m- 
pathy  with  the   Puritan  and  Calvinistic  party,  that 


366 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


June  14, 
1626. 


"  No  Arminianism "    was    as   popular    a   cry   as    "  No 
popery."     The    Mountague    case    well    illustrates    the 
prevalent  religious  prejudice.    Dr.  Mountague,  Rector  of 
Stamford  Rivers,   had   lately   written  against  certain 
proselj'tizing   Jesuits.      His    "  New  Gagg   for  an  Old 
Goose,"  showing  that  the  Calvinistic  tenets  they  im- 
puted to  the  Church  of  England  were  not  its  doctrines, 
had  been  censured  by  Archbishop  Abbot.     Urged  on 
by  Laud,   Mountague  had   answered   his  censor   in  a 
work  of  similar  tendency,  but  more  strongly  worded, 
entitled    "  Appello     Ca3sarem."       The     Commons     of 
Charles's  first  Parliament  took  it  upon  themselves  to 
examine  this  production,  censure  it  as  not  agreeing 
with  the  Synod  of  Dort,  and  require  Mountague  to  find 
bail  of  £2000  for  his  appearance  at  their  bar  in  the 
next   session.     Laud   interceded  for  Mountague   with 
the  king,  on  the  reasonable  ground  that  some  of  the 
impugned  opinions  were  "  the  resolved  doctrine  of  the 
Church  of  England,"  and  others  such  as  were  fit  for 
learned  men  to  view  as  they  chose.    The  king  intimated 
to  the  House  that  what  had  been  there  said  and  resolved 
in  Mountague's  cause  was  displeasing  to  him.     But  in 
this   and  other  matters  Parliament  remained  uncom- 
promising.   The  second  Parliament  renewed  the  attack 
on  Mountague,   determined  that  the  "  Appello  Caesa- 
rem "  was  "  dishonourable  to  the  late  king,   to  many 
worthy  divines,  and  to  other  reformed  Churches  beyond 
the   seas,"    and   prayed    that   the    author    should    be 
punished  according  to  his  demerits,  and  the  book  sup- 
pressed  and   burnt.     The   king,   however,   by   a   pro- 
clamation acquitted  his  chaplain.     The  animus  of  the 
House  was  diverted  to  the  case  of  Buckingham,  whose 
maladministration  was   made   a   pretext   for   refusing 
supply.     To  save  Buckingham,  Charles  dissolved  the 


CHARLES  I.  367 

second  Parliament.  Mountague  incurred  no  further 
persecution,  and  Charles  was  injudicious  enough  to 
make  him  Bishop  of  Chichester  soon  afterwards. 

The  levying  of  tunnage  and  poundage  without 
authority  of  Parliament  had  already  been  denounced 
in  the  Commons.  Charles,  however,  to  raise  the  sub- 
sidies which  he  could  not  get  from  Parliament,  was 
induced  not  only  to  continue  this  questionable  ex- 
action, but  to  raise  a  forced  loan  by  virtue  of  the 
royal  prerogative.  For  refusing  to  lend,  seventy-eight 
gentlemen  were  imprisoned  by  the  Privy  Council. 
The  Church  was  persuaded  to  compromise  itself  by 
abetting  these  proceedings,  and  the  pulpits  rang  with 
arguments  for  royal  prerogative.  It  is  creditable  to  Abbot  now 
Archbishop  Abbot  that  he  incurred  disgrace  for  re-  absofutism 
fusing  to  make  his  high  office  the  tool  of  absolutism. 
A  sermon  of  little  merit  had  been  preached  by  Dr. 
Sibthorpe  at  Northampton  Assizes,  in  which  it  was 
laid  down  that  the  king  had  power /wre  divino  to  make 
laws  and  impose  taxes.  Buckingham,  with  the  royal 
sanction,  sent  this  sermon  to  Lambeth,  to  be  printed 
by  archiepiscopal  authority.  Abbot  refused  his  im- 
primatur, urging  that  several  statements  in  the  sermon 
were  likely  to  give  offence,  and  that  its  inferences  with 
reference  to  the  customary  allegiance  of  subjects  would 
not  stand,  seeing  that  the  loan  had  "  neither  law  nor 
custom  for  it."  For  this  he  was  put,  like  Elizabeth's 
archbishop.  Grind  al,  in  a  state  of  quasi-suspension, 
being  compelled  to  retire  to  his  country  house  for  a 
time. 

In  making  Laud  practically  superior  to  the  primate 
Charles  had  at  all  events  honoured  a  man  of  real  talent, 
and  one  whose  rule  was  mainly  to  the  advantage  of 
the  Church.     But  many  of  the  divines  whom  Charles 


368 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


A.D.  1628. 


The 

"Declara- 
tion" 
attached 
to  the 
Articles. 


Intolerance 
of  the 
Commons. 


promoted  were  men  of  little  merit,  and  the  common 
stepping-stone  to  preferment  was  belief  in  royal  pre- 
rogative. The  case  of  Dr.  Mainwaring  illustrates  the 
king's  principle  of  action.  This  divine  had  preached 
that  "justice  intervenes  not  between  prince  and 
people,  .  .  .  for  justice  is  between  equals;"  that  his  royal 
will  in  imposing  loans  and  taxes,  though  without  the 
consent  of  Parliament,  "  must  be  obeyed  under  penalty 
of  eternal  damnation."  When  Charles  summoned  his 
third  Parliament,  Mainwaring  was  condemned  in  both 
Houses  for  these  statements,  and  sentenced  by  the 
lords  to  imprisonment,  a  fine,  and  three  years'  sus- 
pension. He  escaped,  however,  with  a  brief  incarcera- 
tion and  the  disgrace  of  tendering  an  abject  submission 
to  the  Houses.  Mainwaring  became  at  once  the  object 
of  royal  favour,  and,  after  Laud's  translation,  was  pre- 
ferred to  S.  David's. 

In  retaliation  for  pulpit  politics  came  another  out- 
burst of  House  of  Commons  theology.     Laud  was  of 
opinion  that  there  would  be  no  chance  of  peace  while 
the  predestinarian  dispute  was  permitted  to  rage.     He 
therefore  caused   the    Thirty-nine   Articles   to   be   re- 
printed, with  a  "Declaration"  from  the  king  deprecating 
the  strife  between  Calvinists  and  Arminians,  limiting 
preachers  to  the  simple  and  grammatical  interpretation 
of  the  Articles,  and  declaring  that  Convocation  was  the 
proper  place  for  the  settlement  of  disputed  points  of 
doctrine  or  discipline.     Such  a  tolerant  treatment  of 
the  question  at   issue   was   not   to   the   mind   of  the 
Puritan  faction.     Dr.  Lingard  well  observes  that  these 
men,  if  the  champions  of  civil,  were  the  fiercest  enemies 
of  religious   freedom.     They   were    as   determined   to 
bring  the  Church  under  the  bondage  of  Calvinism  as 
they  were  to  resist  the  king's  encroachments  on  the 


CHARLES  I.  369 

liberties   of  the   subject.      The   imaginary   horrors   of     chap. 
Arniinianism  and  the  real  grievance  of  enforced  taxation     -  ^^^/ 
were  associated  in  all  their  jeremiads.     The  "  Declara- 
tion "  was  assailed  by  Mr.  Eouse,  afterwards  Speaker, 
who  argued  that  "  an  Arminian  was  the  spawn  of  a 
papist,"  and  by  Mr.  Pym,  who  declared,  and  probably 
believed,  that  the  Lambeth  Articles  had  been  acknow- 
ledged to  be  the  doctrine  of  the   Church.     The  last- 
named  member  declared  his  conviction  that  Parliament 
was  the  proper  body  "  to  establish  true  religion,"  and 
that  Convocations  were  bodies  "  of  small  importance." 
In  deference  to  such  arguments  the  Commons  voted  the  The 
"  Vow,"  in  which  they  "  claimed,  protested,  and  avowed  ^Jtea" 
for  truth  "  the  Calvinistic  sense  of  the  Articles,  adding 
that  "  we  reject  the  sense  of  the  Jesuits  and  Arminians 
and  all  others,  wherein  they  differ  from  us." 

The  third  Parliament  continued  uncompromising  and 
unmanageable,  notwithstanding  concessions  on  the  part 
of  the  king.  Charles  had  released  the  seventy-eight 
gentlemen  imprisoned  for  refusing  the  forced  loan. 
He  had  thrown  a  sop  to  Abbot,  recently  readmitted  at 
court,  by  encouraging  him  to  hold  a  convocation  of 
selected  clergymen  to  devise  means  for  rejjressing  popery. 
He  even  gave  unqualified  assent  to  the  "  Petition 
of  Eight."  The  House,  however,  still  clamoured  about 
tunnage  and  poundage,  as  well  as  about  Laud's  pro- 
ceedings in  restoring  decent  worship  and  suppressing 
Puritan  irreverence.  In  these,  as  in  other  proceedino-s 
of  this  primate,  an  excellent  intention  was  disparaged 
by  a  harsh  and  arbitrary  manner  of  action.  Matters 
were  brought  to  a  climax  by  Hollis's  three  resolutions  : 
that  whosoever  should  seek  to  bring  in  Arminianism 
or  other  "innovations"  in  religion  — or  advise  or  aid 
the  taking  of  tunnage  and  poundage — or  pay  the  same 

2  B 


370 


ECCLESIA    ANGLICANA. 


CUAP. 
XIV. 


Suspension 
of  Parlia- 
ments. 
AD.  1629. 


Laud  and 
Strafford. 


Courts  of 
Higli  Com- 
mission 
and  Star 
Chamber, 


— should  be  accounted  a  capital  enemy  to  the  kingdom. 
For  their  share  in  the  disorderly  debate  which  ensued, 
Eliot,  Hollis,  and  others  were  fined  and  imprisoned. 
The  king  dissolved  his  third  Parliament,  and  governed 
without  Parliamentary  advice  for  the  eleven  years 
following. 

The  chief  ministers  during  this  period  were   Laud 
and  Thomas  Wentworth,  who  had  been  won  over  from 
the  ranks  of  the  opposition  and  raised  to  the  peerage 
as   Lord   Strafford.     It   is  plain   that  both   advocated 
principles  which  we  should  now  call  unconstitutional, 
and  that  both  were  disciplinarians  who  did  not  hesitate 
to  punish  offenders  with  sentences  severe,  and  in  modern 
estimation    barbarous.      How  far  such  principles  and 
such  sentences  were  reprehensible  in  those  days  is  by 
no   means  so  manifest.     Both  ministers  were  honest, 
kind-hearted  men,  estimable  in  private  life ;  both  were 
devout  Christians.     We  shall  not  err,  perhaps,  if  we 
impute  to  such  men  no  greater  fault  than  inability  to 
read  the  signs  of  the  times. 

The  most  unpopular,  and  perhaps  most  reprehensible, 
part  of  Charles's  system  was  the  active  employment  of 
the  High  Commission  and  Star  Chamber  Courts.  The 
former,  as  we  have  seen,  had  been  established  in  1559, 
to  represent  the  jurisdiction  of  royalty  in  matters 
ecclesiastical.  To  suppress  religious  disorder,  the  com- 
missioners had  been  ceded  powers  of  wide  scope,  and 
such  as  might  easily  be  abused.  The  encroachments  of 
this  court  on  the  province  of  the  lay  judges  have 
already  been  noticed.  The  Star  Chamber  Court  was 
of  more  ancient  origin.  As  at  present  constituted  it  had 
the  sanction  of  an  Act  of  Parliament  passed  in  1487. 
Its  province  had  been  to  take  cognizance  of  divers  mis- 
demeanours which  it  was  thought  could  not  be  satis- 


CHARLES   I.  371 

factorily  disposed  of  by  an  ordinary  jury.     Its  members,      chap. 
according  to  the  arrangement  of  1487,  were  the  chan-    _5il_ 
cellor,   treasurer,  privy  seal,  two  judges,  and  one  lay 
and  one  spiritual  lord  of  the  Council.     In  such  a  body 
the   king's   influence  would   naturally  be   paramount, 
and  the  Star  Chamber  had  frequently  been  used  as  an 
engine  of  royal  oppression.     Charles,  on  the  Commons 
refusing  his  unreasonable  demand  for  subsidies,  raised 
money  by  questionable  expedients,  and  those  who  made 
resistance  were  informed  against  and  sentenced  in  the 
Star  Chamber.     Charles's  Star  Chamber  was  severe  in  severities 
its  sentences,   but  the   cases   commonly  cited    do   not  chfmb 
exhibit  it  as  more  severe  than  other  courts  in  the  nre-  exagger- 

a,tecl 

ceding  reigns.  Dr.  Sheifield,  recorder  of  Salisbury, 
was  deprived,  imprisoned,  and  fined  £500  for  smashing 
the  stained  window  of  a  church  in  a  fit  of  iconoclastic 
zeal.  The  judges  of  Elizabeth's  reign  would  not  have 
treated  him  less  severely.  The  foul  libellers  PrNnne, 
Bastwick,  and  Burton  ^  were  sentenced  to  be  fined  and 
imprisoned,  to  lose  their  ears  and  be  exposed  in  the 
pillory.  Dr.  Leighton,  who  reviled  the  queen  and  the 
bishops  in  terms  as  strong  as  can  be  conceived,  was 
sentenced  to  be  publicly  whipped  and  branded,    and 

'  The  most  notorious  of  the  libellers,  Prynue  the  lawj'er,  was  as  voluminous  as 
scurrilous.  The  immediate  cause  of  his  troubles  was  a  lengthy  work  called  the  His- 
trio-mastix,  in  which  he  inveighed  against  the  queen's  predilection  for  dancing 
and  theatrical  exhibitions.  He  was  summoned  before  the  Star  Chamber  for  fresh 
libels  in  1637.  The  productions  of  the  libellers  were  chiefly  remarkable  for  their 
strong  flavour.  In  Zion's  Plea  against  Prelates,  by  Dr.  Leighton,  the  bisliops  are 
"  men  of  blood,"  "enemies  to  God  and  the  State;"  the  Church  is  "  antichristian 
and  satanical;  "  the  queen  "a  Canaanite,  a  daughter  of  Heth,  and  an  idolatress." 
Felton,  the  assassin  of  Buckingham,  is  the  subject  of  eulogy.  Bastwick  a 
physician  by  profession,  had  published  a  work  in  which  he  reviled  the  bishops  as 
"  worse  than  the  devil,  rook-catchers,  soul-murderers,  hirelings,  a  commonwealth 
of  rats."  According  to  Burton,  who  was  a  schoolmaster  or  tutor  in  Holy  Orders,  his 
episcopal  superiors  are  "limbs  of  the  beast,  even  Anticlirist,"  "false  prophets," 
"  ravening  wolves,  factors  for  Antichrist,  antichristian  mushrumps."  He  closes  his 
parody  on  the  Lilany  with  the  words,  "From  plague,  pestilence,  and  famine,  from 
bishops,  priests,  and  deacons,  good  Lord,  deliver  us." 


Xiaud  not 
responsible 
for  these. 


372  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

CHAP,  to  have  Ins  ears  cut  off  and  Ms  nostrils  slit.  Sucli  was 
J^t^  the  barbarous  manner  of  treating  criminals  fur  years 
afterwards.  Under  Elizabeth  tlie  libellers  would  have 
certainly  forfeited  their  lives.  When  the  Puritan  faction 
wished  to  inaugurate  their  triumph  with  the  sacrifice 
of  a  prelate,  the  blame  of  all  the  Star  Chamber  pro- 
ceedings was  thrown  on  Archbishop  Laud,  and  modern 
writers  of  the  same  theological  school  have  tried  to 
represent  this  primate  as  delighting  in  persecution. 
As  a  fact  Land's  influence  in  the  Star  Chamber  was  not 
greater  than  that  of  the  other  members,  and  in  the 
trials  of  the  libellers  he  appears  to  have  taken  no  part. 
Butforthe  Oi^  the  othcr  hand,  for  those  proceedings  in  Church 
aitSations  ^^^ttcrs  wMch  the  Puritans  stigmatized  as  "innova- 
tions "  in  religion.  Laud  may  be  considered  exclusively 
responsible.  These  proceedings  will  be  noticed  in 
detail.  It  must  be  premised  that  the  theory  of  abso- 
lutism entertained  by  Charles  and  Laud  extended  to 
ecclesiastical  as  well  as  civil  matters,  so  that  the  rights 
of  Convocation  were  as  plainly  disregarded  now  as  in 
the  days  of  Henry  aud  Edward.  Laud  might  have 
been  styled  Charles's  vicar-general.  "  The  clergy  were 
simply  ordered  to  carry  out  the  royal  will.  The  king 
censures  bishops  for  their  sermons,  ordains  by  his  sole 
will  a  body  of  Canons  for  Scotland,  even  sets  forth 
a  declaration  to  interpret  the  Articles  of  Eeligion.  For 
these  illegal  acts  Laud  was  responsible  as  ecclesiastical 
adviser,  but  the  clergy,  no  less  than  himself,  had  to  pay 
the  penalty."  ^ 

In  1628  Laud  had  been  made  Bishop  of  London.  He 
succeeded  to  the  primacy  when  it  was  vacated  by  the 
death  of  Abbot  in  1633.  Practically,  however,  he  had 
been    at   the   head   of    ecclesiastical   affairs   since   the 

'  Terry,  Student's  English  Church  History,  p.  415. 


CHARLES  I.  373 

beginning  of  the  reign.     The  influence  of  the  favoured      chap. 


XIV. 


prelate  is  apparent  in  the  "  Instructions  "  to  the  bishops 
published  by  the  kino;  in   1629.     This  document,  if  of  Laud's 

,  '^  .  .  .  .      refonna- 

questionable  authority,  is  undeniably  commendable  mtionof 
its  object — the  reformation  of  ecclesiastical  abuses  and 
the  establishment  of  a  decent  and  orderly  ritual.  The 
bishop  is  to  reside  in  his  diocese,  and  not  injure  the 
estates  of  the  see  by  cutting  down  timber  and  granting 
leases  detrimental  to  his  successors.  The  office  of 
lecturer  or  preaching  curate  is  to  be  more  strictly  con- 
trolled ;  divine  service  is  to  be  read  before  the  lecture, 
and  the  preicher  is  to  wear  a  gown  and  not  a  cloak. 
In  the  afternoon  catechizing  is  to  take  the  place  of  the 
sermon.  The  ministry  being  discredited  by  a  host  of 
private  chaplains  who  were  exempt  from  diocesan  control, 
it  is  ordered  that  chaplains  should  be  kept  only  by  noble- 
men and  certain  high  officials.  These  directions  would 
necessarily  rouse  the  hostility  of  four  classes — the  non- 
resident bishops,  the  puritanical  lecturers,  the  secu- 
larized chaplains,  and  the  country  gentlemen  who 
employed  them.  A  less  justifiable  proceeding  was  the 
suppression  of  the  "  Collectors  of  S.  Antholin's,"  a 
corporation  formed  for  the  purpose  of  filling  the 
livings  with  Puritans.  This  society  was  dissolved 
by  an  order  of  the  Court  of  Exchequer  in  1633,  and 
the  livings  which  it  had  bought  in  lapsed  to  the 
Crown. 

Equally  open  to  censure,  however  commendable  in  Laud 
intention,  were  Luud's  provisions  with  regard  to  the  the  Hoiy 
Sacrament  of  the  Altar.     It  will  be  remembered  that  Jabiesft-om 

desecra 

Edward's  Council  had  adopted  Ridley's  innovation,  and  *^°°- 
ordered  the  removal  of  the  Holy  Tables  into  the  middle 
of  the   chancels.      The   innovation   had   been   treated 
hitherto    in    the    spirit   of    compromise.      Elizabeth's 


374  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

"Injunctions,"  though  ordering  that  the  Holy  Table  was 
to  stand  altar-wise  against  the  east  wall  when  not  in 
use,  allowed  it  to  be  placed  in  the  bodj'  of  the  chancel 
in  an  east  and  west  direction  when  Holy  Communion 
was  administered.  In  some  of  the  churches  this  ap- 
pears to  have  become  its  permanent  position.  This 
usage  was  undoubtedly  conducive  to  irreverence  and 
to  disparagement  of  the  Church's  holiest  rite.  The 
churchwarden  was  wont  to  use  the  Holy  Table  when 
making  entries  in  his  account  book ;  the  congregation 
made  it  a  depository  for  their  hats  and  cloaks ;  it  was 
even  used  as  a  post  of  vantage  from  which  to  hear  the 
sermon.  In  the  case  of  S.  Nicholas'  Church,  Abingdon, 
which  had  come  before  the  Court  of  Chancery  in  1628, 
it  had  been  ruled  that  the  Holy  Table  should  remain 
"  constantly  at  the  upper  end  of  the  chancel."  An 
order  to  the  same  effect  was  given  by  the  Council  with 
respect  to  S.  Gregory's  Church,  London.  By  his 
A.D.  1634.  authority  as  primate.  Laud  issued  an  order  that  the 
Holy  Table  should  everywhere  rest  altar-wise  against 
the  east  wall,  and  that  it  should  be  fenced  off  by  rails 
from  the  body  of  the  chancel.  Since  Laud's  arrange- 
ment now  obtains  in  all  our  churches,  we  can  gratefully 
acknowledge  his  services  in  thus  providing  against 
Puritan  irreverence  and  misconception  of  the  Church's 
means  of  grace.  The  informality  of  the  primate's  pro- 
cedure is,  however,  much  to  be  regretted.  The  episco- 
pate— if  we  except  Williams,  who  resisted  from  mere 
captiousness — were  sufficiently  willing  to  execute  the 
order  of  their  metropolitan.  But  the  Puritans,  of  course, 
discovered  popery  in  Laud's  decent  provision.  Dis- 
obedience, however,  was  not  tolerated.  Here  and  there 
churchwardens  were  excommunicated  or  imprisoned  for 
resisting  the  order.     Many  clergymen  ajDpear  to  have 


CHARLES  I.  375 

been  suspended  for  the  same  cause,  especially  in  the      chap. 
Norwich  diocese,  the  head-quarters  of  Puritanism.  ^^^-  . 

The  primate  also  gave  orders  that  ministers  should  And  dis- 
confine  themselves  to  the  Praj'er-book,  and  discontinue  nances 
the  practice  of  using  extemporary  prayers  in  the  pulpit,  pora^y 
Puritan   ministers   had   been  wont  to  interlard  these  ^^^^^^ 
extemporary  effusions  with  Calvinistic  or  political  shib-  slovenly 

^  ->  i.  services. 

boleths.  That  the  people  might  learn  to  value  reverent 
worship  Laud  prescribed  greater  care  for  the  accessories 
of  divine  service.  Provision  was  in  some  places  made 
for  ornate  services,  such  as  offered  a  startling  contrast 
to  the  slovenly  "  kneeless  "  cult  afiected  by  the  Puritans. 
In  his  own  cathedral  Laud  enjoined  that  the  members 
of  the  chapter  should  bow  to  the  altar  at  their  coming 
in  and  going  out  of  the  choir.  In  many  cathedrals  and 
episcopal  chapels  the  use  of  the  cope  was  revived. 
Churches  were  everywhere  restored  and  beautified. 

From  the  ultra-Protestant  party,  who  saw  Eomanism  i,aud 
in  the  doctrines  of  Van  Harmin,  Laud's  useful  labours  charged 
of  course  elicited  a  "No  popery"  cry.     The  author  of  J^o^jSanist 
the  "  Conference  with  Fisher,"  the  champion  of  Angli-  opi^io^s. 
canism  whom  every  papist  admitted  to  be  the  greatest 
enemy  of  Eome  in  England,  hardly  needs  to  be  vindi- 
cated of  a  charge  which  merely  testified  to  the  ignorance 
or  rancour  of  the  Puritan  faction.     Laud's  noble  refuta- 
tion of  this  charge  of  Eomish  proclivity,  when  it  was 
brought  forward  at  his  trial,  deserves,  however,  to  be 
quoted.     "  I  have  converted,"  said  he,  "  several  from 
popery  ;  I  have  taken  an  oath  against  it ;  I  have  written 
a  book  against  it ;  I  have  held  a  controversy  against  it ; 
I  have  been  twice  offered  a  cardinal's  hat  and  refused 
it ;  ^   I  have  been  twice  in  danger  of  my  life  from  a 

'  On  two  occasions  in  1633  a  person  came  secretly  to  Laud,  and,  premising  that 
he  acted  with  the  consent  of  the  Eoman  court,  oEFered  him  a  cardinal's  hat.    Laud 


376  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA, 

CHAP,     popish   plot;    I   Lave    endeavoured    to    reconcile    the 
■  ^^^',  .     Lutherans  and  Calvinists;    and  therefore  I  have  en- 
deavoured to  introduce  popery." 
Laud  The   congregations   of  foreign    Protestants    had  ob- 

requires  Gained  tolcratiou  from  Elizabeth,  on  the  plea  that  they 
refuses  k^^w  not  sufficient  English  to  join  in  the  services  of 
to  conform.  i\^q  Church.  Laud  withdrew  this  concession,  and  bade 
these  privileged  worshippers  conform  to  the  Church  of 
the  English  nation  or  experience  the  disabilities  con- 
sequent on  excommunication.  His  conduct  in  this 
matter  appears  at  first  sight  rather  harsh.  But  it 
could  not  be  expected  that  these  aliens  should  enjoy 
in  perpetuity  religious  liberties  which  were  as  yet 
refused  to  native  non-conformity.  Laud  argued  that 
most  of  the  foreigners  were  practically  Englishmen, 
because  able  to  conduct  business  transactions  in 
English.  They  must  therefore  be  subject  to  the  same 
laws  as  Englishmen.  Those  who  were  really  ignorant 
of  English  he  allowed  to  use  a  translation  of  our 
Liturgy, 
^j^g  It  will   be   remembered  that  the  Sabbatarian   con- 

sabbata-      trovcrsv  had  widened  the  breach  between  Churchmen 

nan  con-  ^ 

troversy.  and  Puritans  in  James's  reign.  The  Church  divines 
desired  such  an  observance  of  the  Sunday  as  obtains 
at  the  present  time  among  most  European  nations. 
When  men  were  not  engaged  in  worship,  they  were  to 
recreate  themselves.  Eecreation,  in  an  age  when  the 
lower  classes  could  not  read  or  write,  took  the  form  of 
bodily  exercise.  Such  amusements  therefore  as  bowl- 
ing, dancing,  drilling,  etc.,  had  been  allowed  not  only 
by  the  English  divines,  but  by  Calvin,  Luther,  and  the 
continental   Protestants.     The  Puritan  theory,   which 

of  course  declined  it.  Tiie  notion  of  there  being  a  Protestant  cardinal  was  then 
common.  But  it  is  more  probable  that  the  offer  was  made  by  some  foe  who 
wished  to  give  a  handle  to  Puritan  or  Romanist  hostility. 


CHARLES  L  377 

converted  the  day  of  gladness  into  a  day  of  gloom,      chap. 

•       •  «  •  n  XIV 

originated  with  the  Dutch  Anabaptists,  and  was  pro-  ■ — ,-L- 
ba"bly  exaggerated  to  accredit  pretensions  to  extra- 
ordinary sanctity,  and  to  gratify  a  love  of  dissidence. 
The  Puritans  at  this  time  preached  that  Sunday 
recreation  was  a  deadly  sin.  Chief  Justice  Eichardson,  Arbitrary 
when  attending  the  assizes  in  Somersetshire,  had  taken  f^gg  q^^  ' 
upon  himself  not  only  to  prohibit  all  Sunday  diversions,  i^otii  sides 
but  to  direct  that  the  prohibition  should  be  published 
by  every  clergyman  in  his  parish  church  on  certain 
specified  Sundays.  Laud  administered  a  severe  rebuke 
to  this  officious  judge,  and  enforced  the  Church  view 
of  the  question  by  a  procedure  almost  equally  inde- 
fensible. James's  "Book  of  Sports"  was  republished. 
To  it  was  attached  a  notice  which  not  only  intimated 
King  Charles's  wish  for  the  continuance  of  Sunday 
sports,  and  instructed  the  justices  to  see  that  they  were 
conducted  in  an  orderly  manner  and  without  inter- 
ference, but  also  directed  the  clergy  to  publish  the 
royal  intimation  in  their  churches.  The  issue  of  such 
a  direction  at  a  time  when  party  feeling  ran  high  was 
most  impolitic.  Laud  is  charged  with  the  graver 
oifence  of  punishing,  by  fine  or  imprisonment,  certain 
clergymen  who,  on  conscientious  grounds,  refused  com- 
pliance. 

As  no  Parliament  existed,  the  unpopularity  of  their  The  war 
proceedings  was  not  appreciated   by  the  Council.     It  s^Jotiand. 
was  not  till  the  war  with  Scotland  compelled  Charles  ■^'■°' "^^^^^ 
to    summon    a  Parliament  that  public   feeling   found 
an   outlet.      The   war   itself  was   connected    with    re- 
ligious  changes.      James   had    introduced    episcopacy 
into  Scotland  Avith  all  care  to  avoid  oifence.     But  the 
jealousy  of  the  Presbyterian  divines  was  roused,  and 
only  sought  a  pretext.     In  Charles's  reign  it  was  easy 


378  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

CHAP,     to   asperse   the   bishops   as   enemies   to   liberty.     The 

~Ji!l!—     nobility  and  gentry  of  Scotland  found  less  difficulty 

in  crediting  such  charges  when  Charles  injudiciously 

admitted  that  he  wished  to  restore  the  lay  impropria- 

Provoked    tions  to  the  Scotch  Church.     The  king  was  warned  by 

cjitate       tiie  Scotch  bishops  that  such  a  scheme  would  be  imprac- 

reiigious      ticable.    They  were  then  requested  to  prepare  a  distinct 

changes.  -^  ^  r      i 

A.D.  1633.   Liturgy  for  Scotland,  which  it  was  hoped  might  be 
more   acceptable.     Charles,   however,  cut   the   ground 
from  under  their  feet  by  drawing  up  a  body  of  Canons 
for  the  northern  Church  without  consulting  the  Scotch 
clergy,  and  sending  it  for  their  acceptance  on  his  own 
authority.       This   proceeding    caused    much    dissatis- 
faction,   especially   as    the   Canons   were   of    a    High 
Church  and  absolutist  tendency.     The  Scotch  Liturgy 
was  reviewed  by  Laud,  Wren,  and  Juxon,  and,  having 
been  ratified  by  the  king,  was  appointed  to  be  used  at 
Easter,  1635.     Its  first  appearance  was,  however,  de- 
layed till   July.     This  procrastination  was  naturally 
attributed    by    the    antagonistic    party    to    timidity. 
Under   such   auspices   it    is   not   surprising   that   the 
introduction  of  the  Prayer-book  did  not  commend  itself 
The  "Stony  to  the  people  of  the  north.  \Kt  its  first  reading  in  Edin- 
ju?yri637.  burgh  Cathedral,  on  the  celebrated  "  Stony  Sabbath,"  a 
riot  was  raised,  the  bishop  and  other  ecclesiastics  being 
pelted  with  whatever  missiles  came  first  to  hand.     The 
agitation  was  not  ephemeral.     A  Puritan  organization 
had  been  busy  throughout  the  country  disseminating 
false  ideas  about  the   Prayer-book  and  the   episcopal 
The  system,  and  now  a  representative  committee  diew  up 

LeaeiSand  "^^^  Celebrated  document   called  the  "  Solemn  League 
Covenant."  g^^^  Covenant."     By  this  they  pledged  themselves  to 
effect,  "  without  respect  of  persons,  the  extirpation  of 
prelacy  ;  that  is,  Church  government  by  archbishops, 


CHARLES  I.  379 

bishops,  their  chancellors  and  commissaries,  deans,  chap. 
chapters,  archdeacons,  and  all  other  ecclesiastical  — .-l— 
officers  depending  on  that  hierarch3\"  This  work  of 
extirj)ation  was  to  be  carried  out  in  England  and 
Ireland,  as  well  as  in  Scotland.  The  Marquis  of 
Hamilton  was  sent  to  Edinburgh  to  restore  harmony, 
but  the  insurgents  would  not  hear  of  compromise. 
They  clamoured  for  a  "  General  As^sembly."  The  re- 
quest was  allowed,  and  the  Assembly  proceeded  to 
abolish  episcopacy,  excommunicate  those  who  favoured 
it,  condemn  the  Liturgy  and  Canons,  and  denounce 
Arminianism  as  antichristian.  A  bloody  persecution 
of  episcopalians,  or  "  malignants,"  followed. 

The  king,  compelled  to  make  war,  saw  that  he  must  The  "Short 
get  subsidies  by  summoning  a  Parliament.  The  new  ment." 
House,  however,  though  orderly  in  point  of  behaviour,  ^^^^'^®*®- 
pertinaciously  refused  to  treat  of  supply.  A  Puritan 
majority  clamoured  for  the  immediate  appointment  of 
a  committee  for  religion.  Laud's  concession  that  the 
committee  should  consist  of  members  of  Convocation 
and  members  of  Parliament  in  equal  numbers  was 
scornfully  rejected.  Mr.  Pym  made  a  long  speech, 
complaining  of  the  introduction  of  "  those  superstitious 
and  infirm  ceremonies  which  accompanied  the  most 
decrepit  age  of  popery."  Altars,  bowing  towards  the 
east,  pictures,  crosses,  crucifixes,  were  the  special  subject 
of  his  complaint.  With  more  show  of  reason  he  de- 
nounced the  j)unishment  of  ministers  for  not  reading 
the  king's  proclamation  attached  to  the  "  Book  of 
Sports,"  and  the  encroachments  of  the  High  Com- 
mission and  the  ecclesiastical  courts.  In  similar 
strains  spoke  other  Puritan  members,  the  upshot  being 
that  the  House  would  not  consider  the  question  of 
"  supply  "  till  these  grievances  were  redressed.     The 


38o 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


CHAP. 
XIV. 


House  of  Lords  conferred  witli  the  Commons,  and  urged 
compliance  with,  the  king's  wishes,  but  the  majority 
continued  refractory.  They  declared  that  they  would 
not  allow  Canons  to  be  passed  in  Convocation  without 
consent  of  Parliament,  and  they  detailed  seven  special 
grievances: — (1.)  The  licensing  of  "popish"  books. 
(2.)  Setting  the  Holy  Table  altar-wise.  (3.)  Setting  up 
crosses,  images,  and  crucifixes  in  cathedrals,  churches, 
and  chapels.  (4.)  Refusing  to  administer  H0I3'  Com- 
munion except  at  the  altar  rails.  (5.)  Enforcement  of 
articles  of  inquiry  at  episcopal  visitations.  (6.)  Molest- 
ing and  depriving  godly  ministers  for  not  reading  the 
"  Book  of  Sports."  (7.)  Enjoining  obeisance  to  the 
altar.  The  king,  finding  the  House  impervious  to 
persuasion,  followed  the  advice  of  Sir  Henry  Vane 
and  dissolved  the  "  Short  Parliament." 

According  to  the  usual  custom  Convocation  should 
have  been  dissolved  when  Parliament  expired.  Laud, 
however,  wished  to  secure  subsidies  from  the  clergy, 
and  to  legalize  the  recently  impugned  "innovations" 
by  ex  post  facto  Canons.  The  anomaly  of  continuing 
the  sessions  of  Convocation  was  justified  by  opinions 
given  by  the  Lord  Chancellor  and  six  judges ;  and  to  be 
quite  safe  Laud  secured  a  new  writ,  summoning  the 
May,  1640.  clergy  to  sit  in  synod.  The  synod  was  full  of  loyalty. 
It  voted  the  required  subsidy  for  the  Scotch  war,  and 
resolved  that  every  minister  should  preach  once  a 
quarter  on  the  divine  right  of  kings  and  on  the  royal 
prerogatives.  One  of  the  Canons  of  this  synod  justi- 
fied Laud's  proceedings  with  reference  to  the  position 
and  enclosure  of  the  altars.  Reception  at  the  altar 
rail  and  obeisance  to  the  altar  are  also  enjoined  by 
this  Canon.  By  the  sixth  Canon  a  new  oath  of  alle- 
giance to  the  doctrine,  discipline,  and  government  of 


The  Con- 
vocation. 


The 
Puritans 


CHARLES  I.  38 1 

the  Clinrcli  was  to  be  demanded  of  the  clergy.     There       chap. 
was  nothing  extraordinary  in  snch  a  demand,  seeing       ^^J- 
that  the  Scotch  had  pledged  themselves  in  the  Covenant  take  ex- 
to  extirpate  prelacy  in  England.    In  fact,  the  form  of  the  tS  sStiT  , 
oath  was  borrowed  from  the  Covenant.    An  unimportant  ^^^°^" 
informant}'-,  however,  in  the  wording  of  this  test  gave  a 
vantage  ground  to  the  unscrupulous  foe.    The  oath  con- 
cluded with  the  words,  "nor  will  I  ever  give  my  consent 
to  alter  the  government  of  this  Church  by  archbishops, 
bishops,  deans,  and  archdeacons,  et  ccetera,  as  it  stands 
now  established."     Et  ccetera  was  merely  an  abbrevia- 
tion in  the  draft  for  "chancellors,  commissaries,  officials, 
and  such  like."    The  substitution  of  these  words  in  the 
printed  copy  was  inadvertently  neglected.     The  Puri- 
tans at  once  attached  an  insidious  meaning  to  the  et 
ccetera  oath.     From   all    parts   of  the   country  it   was 
protested  against.     The  people  were  taught  to  believe 
that  the  bishops  had  some  secret  design  against  their 
liberties.     Already  there   had    been  riots  in    the  pre- 
cincts of  Lambeth  and  Westminster.     Now  a  mob  in- 
vaded the  High  Commission  Court  sitting  at  S.  Paul's, 
with  the  cry,  "  No  bishop  !  no  High  Commission  !  " 

At  the  close  of  the  year  1640  the  successes  of  the  The  "Long 
Scotch  compelled  Charles  to  listen  to  the  popular  ^enT" 
demand  for  a  Parliament.  The  body  returned  was  the 
notorious  "Long  Parliament,"  which  met  on  November  3 
of  this  year,  and  was  not  dissolved  till  March,  1660. 
The  peers  at  York,  meanwhile,  concluded  a  truce  with 
the  invaders.  By  the  treaty  of  Kipon  it  was  arranged 
that  hostilities  should  cease,  and  the  Scotch  army  be 
supported  till  the  points  of  grievance  should  be  settled 
by  the  Parliaments  of  the  two  countries.  In  the  new 
Commons  denunciations  of  the  bishops  and  complaints 
of  the  recent  proceedings  in  Convocation  at  once  found 


382 


ECCLESIA  ANGLICANA. 


CHAP. 
XIV. 


Its  attack 
on  the 
High 
Church 
clerg-y. 


loud  utterance.  It  was  voted  that  the  libellers  Prynne, 
Burton,  and  Bastwick  should  be  compensated  in  large 
sums  by  the  primate  and  the  other  members  of  the  High 
Commission  Court.  Then  followed  a  vote  that  Dr. 
Cosin,  Prebendary  of  Duihara,  a  leading  but  inoffensive 
member  of  the  High  Church  party,  was  "  superstitious 
and  scandalous."  An  absurd  attempt  was  even  made 
to  impeach  him  for  treason  before  the  Lords.  Laud 
had  been  directly  attacked  on  November  10,  on  the 
strength  of  a  petition  from  a  Kentish  clergyman,  who 
declared  he  had  been  grievously  persecuted  by  the 
primate.  To  secure  a  substantial  basis  for  his  im- 
peachment, the  fallen  Williams,  who  had  been  de- 
servedly imprisoned  for  subornation  of  perjury,  was 
released  and  urged  to  take  proceedings  against  Laud. 
Williams  had  sufficient  sense  of  shame  to  refuse.  The 
primate  was  at  last  formally  impugned  in  both  Houses 
on  December  16.  The  Commons  resolved  that  the 
recent  Canons  of  Convocation  tended  to  disparage  the 
king's  prerogative  and  the  liberty  of  the  subject,  and 
charged  Laud  with  their  authorship.  The  Lords  on 
the  same  day  heard  a  charge  from  the  Scotch  com- 
mission, against  Strafford  and  Laud,  to  the  effect  that 
they  had  forced  on  the  Scotch  Church  a  Liturgy  and 
Canons  containing  "  many  dangerous  errors  in  point  of 
doctrine."  It  was  agreed  between  the  Houses  that 
Mr.  Holies  should  impeach  the  archbishop  before  the 
Lords,  on  the  charge  of  high  treason.  The  primate's 
warm  rejoinder  was  a  pretext  for  committing  him  to 
the  custody  of  Black  Eod,  and  on  March  1  he  was 
conveyed  to  the  Tower.  Among  the  bishops.  Wren  of 
Ely,  and  Pierce  of  Bath  and  Wells,  were  selected  for 
attack.  Both  Avere  impeached  and  required  to  find 
heavy  bail  for  their  appearance  in  the  House  of  Lords. 


CHARLES  I.  383 

A  little  later,  they  were  committed  to  the  Tower,  where      chap. 
Wren  remained  for  eighteen  years.     Strafford  was  im-      Ji^I_^ 
peached  in  the  following  spring,  as  having  subverted 
true   religion   and  the  rights  of  Parliament.     It  was 
found   impossible   to  convict   him   legally  of  treason. 
The  Commons,  not  to  be  baulked  of  their  prey,  deter- 
mined to  convict  him  by  a  bill  of  attainder.     Charles's 
timidity  impelled  him  to  the  crime  of  ratifying  this 
unrighteous  procedure,  and  the  great  statesman  was  May  19, 
beheaded. 

The  Church  was  now  to  make  a  terrible  atonement 
for  its  attachment  to  absolutist  principles.  Already 
the  Puritan  Commons  had  begun  to  tout  for  petitions 
against  Church  discipline  or  against  individual  clergy- 
men. The  incumbents  named  in  these  petitions  were 
summoned  forthwith  to  defend  themselves  before  the 
House.  This  was  the  prelude  to  an  attack  which,  both 
in  the  extent  of  its  range  and  the  pitiless  animosity  of 
its  procedure,  bears  comparison  with  the  famous  per- 
secutions of  the  early  ages.  These  severities  will  be 
described  in  detail  hereafter.  We  shall  confine  our- 
selves for  the  present  to  those  proceedings  in  Parlia- 
ment which  gave  them  a  show  of  legality.  As  early  The 
as  January  31  the  House  of  Commons  had  assumed  to  ^^on^of 
itself  a  right,  unsanctioned  by  precedent,  to  appoint  a  diurcnes. 
commission  for  the  visitation  of  churches.  The  pro- 
ceeding was  a  kind  of  parody  on  the  visitations 
sanctioned  by  the  Crown  in  1547  and  1559.  The 
Commissioners  thus  appointed  were  to  "  demolish  and 
remove  ...  all  images,  altars,  or  tables  turned  altar- 
wise,  crucifixes,  superstitious  pictures,  monuments,  and 
reliques  of  idolatry  "  out  of  all  churches  and  chapels. 
Such  was  the  authority  for  that  work  of  Vandalism 
which  was  in  progress  during  the  next  twenty  years, 


384 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


and  whicli  has  left  its  indelible  memorial  in  most  of 
our  noblest  fanes.  The  House  of  Lords  was  so  far 
The  "Com-  drawn  along  by  the  stream  of  popular  opinion  as  to 
Religion"  appoint  a  "  Committee  of  Religion "  on  March  15. 
This  committee  consisted  of  ten  earls,  ten  barons,  and 
ten  bishops.  It  was  to  inquire  into  all  religious  inno- 
vations introduced  since  the  Eeformation,  and,  if 
requisite,  to  "  examine  the  degrees  and  perfection  of 
the  Eeformation  itself."  Four  bishops  only — Williams, 
Hall,  Morton,  and  Usher — consented  to  attend  the 
sessions  of  this  committee.  Its  proceedings  were  inter- 
rupted by  the  sweeping  measures  of  the  Parliament.  A 
strong  party  in  the  Lower  House  longed  to  decatho- 
licize  the  Church  by  a  prompt  extermination  of  epis- 
copacy and  a  substitution  of  the  Presbyterian  system. 
This  procedure  was,  of  course,  warmly  advocated 
by  the  Scotch  commissioners.  It  was  opposed,  how- 
ever, as  unnecessary,  by  many  who,  though  they  had 
headed  the  cry  against  absolutist  principles,  had  no 
fault  to  find  with  episcopacy  judged  on  its  own  merits. 
And  to  the  Independent  contingent,  afterwards  known 
as  the  "  Rump,"  such  a  scheme  savoured  too  little  of 
anarchy. 

In  March  a  measure  passed  the  Lower  House,  not 
^c^*acy  only  disabling  clergymen  from  serving  as  magistrates, 
but  excluding  bishops  from  the  House  of  Lords.  This 
precipitate  alteration  of  the  constitution  was  rejected 
in  the  Upper  House.  The  Commons  thereupon  made 
an  assault  on  episcopacy,  and  got  as  far  on  June  15  as 
the  abolition  of  "  deans  and  chapters,  archdeacons, 
prebendaries,  and  canons."  The  Presbyterian  party 
were  disgusted  at  the  survival  of  the  bishops.  The 
Canons  of  1640,  that  special  bugbear  of  the  "Long 
Parliament,"    were   now   utilized   as   a   pretext.      An 


CHARLES  I.  385 

impeacliment  was  preferred  against  thirteen  bisliops  for  chap. 
their  share  in  passing  these  Canons.  The  absurdity  of  ^IZ:_ 
this  expedient  was,  however,  exposed  in  the  plea 
drawn  up  for  the  bishops  by  Mr.  Chute,  their  counsel. 
Popular  petitions  against  episcopal  government  were 
then  prepared.  The  Church  party,  however,  responded 
with  signatures  of  far  greater  weight,  and  even  of 
larger  number,  in  behalf  of  the  impugned  system. 
Open   violence   was   next   tried.       The   mob   was   en-  The 

^  ^  ^  ^  ^  spiritual 

couraged  to  insult  and  assail  the  bishops  on  their  way  lords  are 
to  the  House,  until  they  found  attendance  so  perilous 
that  they  were  forced  to  absent  themselves.  Twelve 
of  them  signed  a  protest  against  all  laws,  orders, 
votes,  etc.,  passed  during  their  enforced  absence.  This 
procedure  caused  an  extraordinary  exasperation  in 
the  Upper  House.     The  bishops   were  at    once   com-  ^^^ 

^  ^  ^  imprisoned 

mitted  to  the  Tower.     Ten  of  them  were  released  after  Jan.  so, 

1642 

eighteen  days'  imprisonment,  but  on  February  6  a  bill 
excluding  all  the  lords  spiritual  from  the  Upper  House 
was  easily  carried. 

To  one  quarter  at  least  the  episcopate  might  have  inconsis- 
looked  for  sympathy  and  support.  The  conduct  of  King 
Charles,  however,  towards  the  victims  of  his  absolutist 
policy  only  too  painfully  illustrated  the  text,  "  Put 
not  your  trust  in  princes."  The  weakest  point  in  the 
absolutist  cause  was  the  present  king's  utter  incapacity 
even  to  lead  his  own  part}'.  Charles  had  sacrificed 
Strafford.  In  Scotland  he  had  made  most  disgraceful 
concessions  to  the  Covenanters,  and  even  ratified  a  bill 
which  declared  that  the  "  government  of  the  Church  by 
archbishops  and  bishops  was  repugnant  to  the  Word 
of  God,"  and  that  "the  prelates  were  enemies  to  the 
propagation  of  the  true  reformed  Protestant  religion."  ^ 

•  Collier,  Eccles.  History,  vol.  viii.  p.  225. 

2  c 


386 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


CHAR 

XIV, 


The  civil 
war. 


He  now  assented  to  the  Bill  which  deprived  the  English 
bishops  of  their  seats  in  the  House  of  Lords.  It  is 
supposed  that  the  king's  inconsistency  was  intended 
for  a  feat  of  diplomacy,  his  object  being  to  break- 
up the  alliance  of  English  Presbyterians  and  Scotch 
Covenanters.  Its  real  effect  was  the  discouragement 
or  alienation  of  the  thousands  who  had  petitioned 
for  the  maintenance  of  the  present  constitution  in 
Church  and  State. 

The  Parliamentary  faction  took  up  arms  this  summer, 
and  war  raged  till  the  surrender  of  Oxford  in  June, 
1646.  Both  parties  throughout  this  period  legislated 
on  religious  matters,  but  as  the  king  simply  cancelled 
the  innovations  introduced  by  Parliament,  it  will  be 
sufficient  to  continue  our  account  of  the  latter.  Until 
the  sword  was  appealed  to,  the  House  had  been  inclined 
to  tolerate  an  adaptation  of  episcopacy  to  Erastian 
opinions.  The  definite  severance  of  Churchmen  and 
Puritans,  and  the  urgent  necessity  of  securing  the 
sympathies   of    Scotland,   now  made   this    compromise 

The  "Root  impossible.  The  "Boot  and  Branch  Bill,"  abolishing 
episcopacy  as  "  a  great  impediment  to  Eeformation " 
and  "  prejudicial  to  the  State,"  was  accordingly  carried 
in  September,  1642. 

The  reluctance  with  which  this  concession  to  the 
northern  religionists  was  made  was  indicated  by  a 
provision  that  the  Act  should  not  come  into  operation 
for  a  year.  But  the  success  of  the  king's  troops  soon 
surmounted  all  such  scruples.  The  Scotch  alliance  had 
to  be  retained  at  all  costs,  and  when  the  commissioners 
came  from  the  north  they  required  that  the  English 

Sept.  1643.  Parliament  should  accept  the  "  Solemn  League  and  Cove- 
nant." An  Assembly  of  Divines  had  been  appointed 
by  the  Parliament  in  June,  1643.     It  consisted  of  one 


and  Branch 
Bill 


The  Cove- 
nant ac- 
cepted 
by  the 
Commons. 


CHARLES  I.  387 

hundred  and  thirty-one  ministers  and  thirty  lay 
assessors — ten  lords  and  twenty  commoners.  Some  of 
the  ministers  were  Puritans  in  Holy  Orders,  and  to 
give  the  Assembly  an  appearance  of  respectability, 
Usher  and  other  eminent  Churchmen  had  been  named 
as  members.  These  persons  soon  ceased  to  attend  the 
sessions.  The  Assembly  had  already  begun  to  revise 
the  Thirty-nine  Articles.  It  now  submitted  to  the 
humiliating  demands  of  the  Scotch  Commissioners,  and 
the  ordained  Puritans  pledged  themselves,  reluctantly 
or  otherwise,  to  extirpate  the  source  of  their  minis- 
terial powers.  The  Covenant  was  subscribed  by  the 
Commons,  the  Puritan  Churchmen  therein  not  ex-  And  by  the 
cepted,  on  September  25.  It  was  to  be  read  in  every  minster 
London  church  on  the  Sunday  following.  A  few  ^.s^mbiy. 
months  later,  it  was  ordered  that  every  person  above  enforced  on 

'  ^  v'     r  all  adults. 

the  age  of  eighteen  should  renounce  the  Anglican  ^eb.  is. 
system  by  swearing  his  acceptance  of  the  Covenant. 
Such  were  the  tender  mercies  of  the  pretended  ad- 
vocates of  religious  liberty  when  possessed  of  civil 
power.  Much  has  been  said  of  the  severities  of 
Bancroft  and  Laud  in  enforcing  conformity  on  the 
clerical  body ;  but  what  were  these  to  the  outrage 
perpetrated  on  tender  consciences  when  all  men  were 
summoned  to  renounce  and  denounce  the  religious 
system  under  which  they  had  been  nurtured.  Of 
course,  one  result  of  these  proceedings  was  the  flight 
of  thousands  of  conscientious  clergymen  from  their 
benefices.  These  the  Presbyterian  divines  appro^Driated 
to  themselves. 

In  October,  1644,  the  Assembly  of  Divines  issued  a  The 
Directory  of  Public  Worship,  which  was  first  sent  to  of  puijUc'^ 
Scotland   for   approval,   and   then  sanctioned    by   the  jln!i645. 
Parliament.      In   this   document   certain   broad    rules 


388 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


Use  of  the 
Prayer- 
book  pro- 
scribed. 
Aug  1645. 


The  Pres 
bjrterian 
Scheme. 


were  laid  down  for  the  conduct  of  a  religious  service 
without  liturgy  or  settled  formulae  of  any  kind,  the 
Lord's  Prayer  excepted.  Heads  were  given  for  a  State 
prayer  which  was  to  include  a  petition  for  the  "  con- 
version "  of  the  queen.  There  were  also  prescriptions 
for  the  administration  of  the  Lord's  Supper,  which  was 
to  be  received  in  a  sitting  posture.  The  dead  were 
to  be  buried  without  prayers  or  religious  ceremonies. 
The  Presbyterian  Directory  proved,  as  might  have 
been  expected,  generally  unpopular.  But  men  were  not 
free  to  revert  to  the  Church's  system.  Penalties  were 
provided  to  restrain  the  use  of  the  Common  Prayer  in 
public  or  in  private — viz.  for  the  first  offence  a  fine 
of  five  pounds,  for  the  second  ten,  for  the  third  a  year's 
imprisonment.  The  Presbyterian  scheme  provided  also 
for  the  formation  of  classes,  each  representing  a  certain 
district.  The  aspirant  to  the  ministry  was  first  to  be 
elected  by  a  congregation,  then  to  present  himself  to  the 
presbytery  of  his  classis,  who  were  empowered  to  examine 
and  ordain  him.  The  authority  of  the  presbyters  was, 
however,  subsequently  modified  by  an  Act  of  Parlia- 
ment appointing  "Triers,"  mostly  laymen,  who  were  em- 
powered to  take  part  in  the  examinations  and  elections. 
Provincial  and  national  assemblies  were  al«o  included 
in  the  scheme.  For  guidance  in  doctrine,  the  Assembly 
put  forth  a  Longer  and  a  Shorter  Catechism  (the  latter 
intended  for  children),  both  of  a  Calvinistic  character, 
and  a  Confession  of  Faith  which  was  intended  to  super- 
sede the  Thirty-nine  Articles.  The  thirty-three  Articles 
of  this  Confession  are  still  subscribed  by  ministers  of 
the  Scotch  Presbyterian  establishment. 
Dissolution      The  Presbyterian  system,  however,  was  not  destined 

of  the  "^  J  '  '  ^ 

West-  to  strike  root  in  Ensjland.     To  the  Erastians  and  Inde- 

rainster  . 

Assembly,   pendents  it  had  always  appeared  only  as  "  prelacy  "  in 


Bee.  1646 


CHARLES  I.  389 

a  new  guise.  Its  progress  was  stayed  by  the  growing  chap. 
strength  of  the  revolutionary  party,  who,  by  the  "  Self-  ^^^- 
denying  Ordinance"  of  April,  1645,  had  secured  the 
management  of  the  army.  With  commendable  pre- 
science the  divines  of  the  Westminster  Assembly 
began,  early  in  1647,  to  disperse  to  their  new  benefices, 
and  the  sessions  of  this  celebrated  body  thus  came  to 
an  end,  without  collision  with  the  Independent  or 
anarchical  sectaries,  and  indeed  without  any  formal 
dissolution. 

From  March  to  November,  1644,  Archbishop  Laud  Archbishop 

.         Laud 

had  been  subjected  to  a  trial  on  the  charge  of  "high  unfairly 
treason."  The  indictments  were  drawn  up  by  Prynne, 
the  martj^r  libeller.  Against  the  primate,  says  his 
biographer,  were  arraj^ed  "  the  whole  of  the  Puritans, 
whether  Presbyterians,  Anabaptists,  Independents, 
Familists,  or  Gospellers  :  the  Jesuits,  too,  had  intrigued 
against  him  who  was  the  greatest  enemy  whom  Eome 
encountered  since  the  days  of  Luther."  The  trial 
was  a  mere  farce.  The  primate  never  had  the  same 
lords  present  at  his  afternoon  defence  as  had  heard 
the  morning  impeachment.  He  was  denied  the  assist- 
ance of  counsel.  His  witnesses  could  not  be  sworn. 
His  private  papers  and  diary  had  been  seized  by 
Prynne ;  they  were  mutilated  and  interpolated  by  his 
accusers.  Spirited  and  vigorous  notwithstanding  his 
three  years'  imprisonment,  the  brave  old  man  de- 
fended himself  with  an  eloquence  and  ability  which 
won  the  admiration  of  Prynne  himself.  He  maintained 
an  even  temper  throughout,  though  mobbed  and  in- 
sulted by  the  Puritan  fanatics,  who  were  especially 
irritated  by  his  complete  refutation  of  the  charge  that 
he  had  encouraged  "  popery."  The  judges  unanimously 
declared  that  no  act  of  Laud's  was  treasonable  by  any 


390 


ECCLESIA   ANGLIC  ANA. 


known  law  of  tlie  land.  The  same  disgraceful  expedient, 
therefore,  was  adopted  as  in  the  case  of  Strafford.  A 
bill  of  attainder  was  brought  into  the  House  of 
Commons,  and  was  passed  on  November  13.  The  Lords, 
unable  to  arrest  the  progress  of  democratic  tyranny, 
were  wont,  at  this  time,  to  absent  themselves  from  the 
House  when  any  proceedings  of  extraordinarily  unjust 
character  were  to  be  sanctioned.  Six  peers  only  could 
be  induced  to  vote  for  the  bill  in  the  Upper  House. 
The  great  champion  and  confessor  of  Anglicanism  was 
executed  on  Tower  Hill  on  January  10,  1645. 

The  career  of  the  unfortunate  sovereign  was  soon 
to  be  cut  short  in  a  similar  manner.  The  fatal  blow 
at  Naseby  was  succeeded  by  the  siege  of  Oxford,  the 
flight  to  the  Scotch  camp  at  Newark,  and  the  sale  of 
the  fugitive  to  the  English  Parliament.  As  a  ruler 
and  a  politician,  Charles  had  adopted  tortuous  causes, 
theciiTirch,  ^^  guilt  of  which  is  somcwhat  emphasized  by  their  un- 
successful issue ;  but  when  his  own  safety  only  was  im- 
perilled, he  disdained  the  use  of  chicanery  and  craft. 
He  was  a  sincere  believer  in  the  doctrines  of  the  Church, 
and  he  would  not  save  his  life  by  repudiating  her.  The 
Scotch  vainly  urged  hi  in  to  secure  liberty  by  sanction- 
ing the  Covenant.  The  English  Presbyterians  vainly 
tempted  him  to  make  a  cession  of  the  Church  estates. 
The  utmost  that  could  be  wrung  from  him  was  an 
establishment  of  Presbyterianism  side  by  side  with  epis- 
copacy, on  principles  of  mutual  toleration.  The  jealousy 
of  the  Independent  faction  was  roused  by  this  con- 
cession to  the  rival  faction.  The  king  was  carried  off 
to  Hurst  Castle,  and  Colonel  Pride  effectually  silenced 
the  less  anarchical  contingent  by  purging  the  House 
of  all  members  save  some  fifty  Independents.  These 
appointed  the  court   of  one    hundred   and   thirty-five 


June  14, 
1645. 


Charles 
refuses  to 
sacrifice 


CHARLES  I.  391 

commissioners  who  adjudged  the  king  to  be  "  a  tyrant,  chap. 
traitor,  murderer,  and  enemy  to  the  good  people  of  _f:^ZL. 
this  nation,"  and  sentenced  him  to  "be  put  to  death -^^«^ is 

■^  executed. 

by  severine:  his  head  from  his  body."  Jan.  so, 

.  .  .  .      1649. 

The  sufferings  of  English  Churchmen  during  this  Theper- 
period  of  confusion  can  scarcely  be  adequately  depicted  the  church. 
in  such  a  work  as  the  present.  The  scene  presented  is  in 
one  respect  almost  without  counterpart  in  the  world's 
history.  The  cruelties  of  the  dominant  party  have, 
of  course,  been  surpassed  in  many  revolutionary  epochs. 
But  never,  perhaps,  have  cruelty  and  hatred,  malice 
and  uncharitableness  flaunted  so  audaciously  in  the 
garb  of  religion,  or  the  depths  of  Pharisaic  hypocrisy 
been  so  nearly  sounded,  as  in  this  era  of  Puritan 
ascendency.  As  early  as  January,  1641,  the  Anglican 
clergy  had  been  assailed  with  the  bitterest  invectives 
in  Pailiament,  and  discontented  parishioners  had  been 
incited  to  present  petitions  against  their  incumbents. 
Mr.  John  White  had  declared,  in  the  House  of  Commons, 
that  eight  thousand  of  the  clergy  were  "  unworthy  and 
scandalous,  and  deserved  to  be  cast  out ;  "  and  numerous 
speakers  had  proved  the  clergy  guilty  of  "  popery, 
idolatry,  superstition,  enmity  to  godliness,  malignancy," 
etc.  The  gravamen  in  reality  implied  nothing  more 
than  absolutist  tenets  and  attachment  to  Church  prin- 
ciples. These  charges  were,  however,  made  a  pretext 
for  supplementing  the  clergy  by  a  force  of  lecturers, 
who  would  tune  the  pulpits,  and  thus  prepare  men's 
minds  for  the  attack  on  Churcli  property.  No  minis- 
ter could  refuse  to  admit  these  men  into  the  pulpit 
without  danger  of  incurring  imprisonment  or  se- 
questration. ^  Meantime  Committees  for  Scandalous  iSttee™or 
Ministers  had  been  appointed,  whose  business  it  was  MkSst^S^ 

*  Walker,  Sufferings  of  the  Clergy,  p.  30. 


392  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

CHAP,  to  try  every  clergyman  against  wliom  any  sort  of 
■  ^^7  -  charge  could  be  trumped  up.  These  trials  resulted 
almost  invariably  in  the  imprisonment  and  sequestra- 
tion of  the  accused.  Mr.  White,  who  was  the  chair- 
man of  one  committee,  and  reaped  a  golden  harvest 
of  fees  off  the  sequestered  livings,  gives  an  account  of 
these  proceedings  in  his  "  First  Century  of  Scandalous 
Malignant  Priests,"  published  in  1643.  It  is  instruc- 
tive to  observe  how  the  writer  gravely  intermingles 
the  grossest  aspersions  on  character  and  morals  with 
such  charges  as  "  bowing  at  the  name  of  Jesus  "  and 
"  neglecting  the  Parliament  fasts."  In  reality  the 
clergy  were  punished  for  their  religious  and  political 
views  alone.  Yiciousness  of  life  was,  of  course,  detected 
by  the  Puritan  inquisitors  wherever  High  Church  and 
royalist  principles  prevailed.  The  clergy  generally 
had  espoused  these  principles.  They  are  accordingly 
represented  as  "  vermin,  .  .  .  popish  dregs,  given  over 
to  vile  affections,  to  superstition,  ambition,  persecutions, 
covetousness,  malignity,  and  all  wickedness,"  and, 
as  "  priests  of  Baal,  sons  of  Belial,  .  .  .  priests  of 
Bacchus,  unclean  beasts."  Similar  language  was  used 
by  the  "  godly  "  lecturers  who  had  invaded  the  pulpits. 
,jj^g  The  war   soon   paved   the  way  for   more   extended 

Committee  schemes  of  Confiscation.     On  the  pretext  that  the  Puri- 

for  Plun-  ^  ■•■ 

dered  tanical  cler2;v  had  suffered  from  the  royalist  troops, 

Ministers.  .  t.^-.     • 

a  central  Committee  for  Plundered  Ministers  was  ap- 
pointed. A  great  clearance  was  now  made  of  such 
clergy  as  were  suspected  of  "  malignant "  {i.e. 
"  royalist ")  proclivities,  their  benefices  being  given 
sometimes  to  Presbyterian  ministers,  sometimes  to 
self-ordained  mechanics.  Neither  bribery  nor  oppres- 
sion could  always  raise  anything  like  a  plausible 
charge  against  the  victims,  and  the  piety  of  the  com- 


CHARLES  I.  393 

missioners  often  laboured  to  find  a  stumbling  block. 
"  In  Cumberland  one  clergyman  was  deprived  for  hunt- 
ing ;  and  the  charge  against  another  was  that  he  had 
been  seen  walking  in  his  garden  on  a  Sunday  evening. 
In  Shropshire  one  was  sequestered  avowedly  for  his 
learning,  one  of  the  committee  remarking  that  priests 
and  Jesuits  were  learned  and  therefore  did  the  more 
harm.  In  Gloucestershire  a  clergyman's  greyhound 
gave  chase  to  a  hare  that  accidentally  crossed  his  path ; 
this  was  termed  '  coursing  on  a  Sabbath  day,'  and  cost 
his  master  his  benefice."  ^ 

After   the   acceptance   of   the   Scotch    Covenant  by  The 
Parliament,    these   pretexts    became   unnecessary.      A  fo^Ied^'^ 
pledge  of  hostility  to  that  form  of  government  which  ^^^  '^^^ 
had  prevailed  in  the  Church  since  the  Apostolic  age  ^®^-  ^®^^- 
was  noAv  forced  upon  the  conscience.     A  clean  sweep 
was  made  of  the  clergy  who  refused  to  impugn  this 
Catholic  essential.     Puritans  of  elastic  principles  alone 
survived   to   share  the    Church    emoluments  with   the 
Presbyterians  and  other  sectaries. 

The  sufferings  consequent  on  these  ejectments  have  Terrible 
not  often  been  surpassed   in  the   annals   of  religious  ofthe^^^^ 
persecution.     It  has  been  estimated  that  at  least  seven  ^^^^'S'^- 
thousand  incumbents  (many  of  them  married)  were  at 
once  deprived  of  their  livelihood.     To  these  must  be 
added    a    large    number    of    unbeneficed    clergymen, 
curates,   schoolmasters,    chaplains,    etc.     A  large  pro- 
portion were  relegated  to  imprisonment,  the  horrors  of 
which  were  often  intensified  by  ingenious  cruelty.     So 
full  were  the  prisons  that  the  ships  on  the  Thames, 
and  even  the  pest-bouses,  were  converted  into  places 
of    confinement.      Three   Cambridge   heads   of  houses 
were    among    the    gang   of    "  fourscore    prisoners    of 

'  Sufferings  of  the  Clergy,  p.  126. 


394  ECCLESIA   ANGLIC  ANA. 

CHAP,     quality ,"   who  were    confined   under   hatclies    on    the 


XIV. 


Thames,  without  straw  to  lie  on,  and  almost  with- 
out air  to  breathe,  their  custodians  having  deliberately 
stopped  up  "  all  the  small  auger  holes  and  all  other 
inlets  which  might  relieve  them  with  fresh  air."  ^  Not 
many  cases  of  violent  death  are  recorded,  but  it  can 
hardly  be  doubted  that  an  immense  number  of  lives  were 
cut  short  by  the  rigours  of  such  confinements,  and  in 
the  cases  of  the  unimprisoned  by  sheer  starvation.  It 
will  be  borne  in  mind  that  the  families  of  the  ejected 
clergymen  were  left  without  the  means  of  maintenance. 
The  committees  of  sequestration  in  1643  were  indeed 
enabled  to  grant  one-fifth  of  the  benefice  to  the  families 
of  ejected  incumbents,  but  they  did  not  avail  them- 
selves of  these  powers.  In  1647  it  was  ordered  that 
this  allowance  should  be  given.  The  injunction  came, 
however,  after  most  of  the  mischief  had  been  done.  It 
was,  moreover,  clogged  by  so  many  provisoes  on  the 
part  of  the  commissioners,  and  was  so  easily  evaded  by 
the  usurping  preacher,  that  it  rarely  brought  the 
victims  any  relief. 
Fate  of  the       Of  the  bisliops  Skinner  of  Oxford  appears  to  have 

bishops.  ^ 

come  oil  best.  He  was  allowed  to  retire  to  the  rectory 
of  Launton,  in  Oxfordshire,  and  seems  to  have  used 
the  Prayer-book  services  there  with  impunity  until  the 
Eestoration.  Williams  espoused  the  cause  of  the 
Parliament,  and  died  in  disrepute  in  1650.  "Of  the 
whole  number,"  says  Mr.  Walker,  "  one  was  beheaded 
without  any  colour  of  law,  and  one  joined  the  faction 
which  had  ruined  his  brethren ;  eigliteen  died  in 
poverty ;  only  nine  survived  the  confusions  and  were 
restored  to  their  sees,  and  of  these  one  had  been  im- 
prisoned for  eighteen  years." 

'  See  the  account  in  Mercurius  Rusticus,  chap.  xii. 


universi- 


CHARLES  L  395 

To  tlie  wanton  acts  of  desecration  perpetrated  by  the  chap. 
fanatics  hundreds  of  our  churches  still  hear  witness.  The  .^i^L- 
iconoclastic  frenzy  apparently  reached  its  heiofht  in  the  ofthe 

•        ^  ^  "  ^  .         cliurclies. 

years  1643-45.  In  1644  the  notorious  William  Dowsing 
records  his  destruction  of  crosses,  pictures,  caryed  work, 
stained  glass,  and  "  superstitious  inscriptions  in  brass  " 
in  about  a  hundred  and  fifty  Suffolk  churches.  A  similar 
work  of  deyastation  was  going  on  in  all  parts  of  the 
country.     The  uniyersities  suffered  more  especially  as  of the 

univ — 

centres  both  of  loyalty  and  Church  principle.  Cam-  ties, 
bridge  was  made  the  garrison  town  of  the  seyen  asso- 
ciated counties.  King's  College  Chapel  became  a 
parade-ground  for  the  rebel  forces  ;  the  college  bridges 
were  defaced ;  the  groyes  were  cut  down  and  sold  for 
timber;  the  orchards  and  gardens  were  laid  waste. 
Libraries,  museums,  eyen  the  rooms  of  students,  were 
ransacked  and  despoiled.  The  cliapels  were  desecrated 
and  defaced  by  Dowsing  and  his  associates,  and  each 
college  was  charged  a  fee  of  forty  shillings  for  the  job. 
In  imitation  of  the  yisitation  of  the  monasteries  in 
1535,  an  oath  of  discoyery  was  put  to  the  fellows 
and  students,  binding  them  to  accuse  each  other  of 
malignancy,  etc.^  At  the  so-called  "  regulation "  of 
1543,  twelye  masters  and  oyer  three  hundred  and  fifty 
fellows,  scholars,  and  exhibitioners  were  ejected,  and 
many  of  them  imprisoned.  The  Earl  of  Manchester 
filled  up  some  of  these  places  with  his  own  creatures. 
But  the  greater  part  of  the  revenues  were  appropriated 
to  proyide  the  expenses  of  the  war.  In  1649,  when 
the  Independents  bad  gained  the  ascendency,  another 
"regulation"  was  authorized,  and  the  "Engagement" 
was  enforced  instead  of  the  Coyenant.  Oxford  had  under- 
gone considerable  harassing  in  1642-43.     Its  surrender 

'  Querela  Cantabrigiensis,  p.  20. 


396  ECCLESIA  ANGLICANA. 

CHAP,     in    1646  was   succeeded   by  a   formal   visitation.      So 

X.IV 

— ..-L*  dauntless  was  the  attitude  of  the  whole  university 
body,  that  the  work  of  the  visitors  was  not  completed 
till  1649.  It  appears  that  almost  all  the  masters  and 
fellows  and  scholars  were  depiived,  ejected,  or  im- 
prisoned for  disallowing  the  authority  of  the  visitors 
and  refusing  the  Covenant.  Some  five  hundred  persons 
were  thus  reduced  to  destitution.  In  their  place  came 
the  illiterate  rabble  described  by  Anthony  Wood.  "  The 
generality  of  them  had  mortified  countenances,  puling 
voices,  and  eyes  commonly,  when  in  discourse,  lifted 
up,  with  hands  laying  on  their  breasts.  They  mostly 
had  short  hair  (which  at  this  time  was  commonly 
called  the  committee-cut),  and  went  in  cuerjpo,  in  a 
shabbed  condition,  and  looked  rather  like  'prentices 
or  antiquated  school-boys  than  academicians  or 
ministers." 

Such  is  the  story  of  nine  years  of  Puritan  persecution. 
Its  fury  abated  about  the  year  1649,  when  seemingly 
no  more  outrages  could  well  be  devised.  The  clergy 
had  by  this  time  been  reduced  to  a  miserable  state 
of  destitution,  and  all  ecclesiastical  property  had  been 
confiscated  or  profaned.  Moreover,  the  spoilers  had 
begun  to  wrangle  over  the  booty,  and  the  mutual 
jealousies  of  Presbyterian  and  Independent  diverted 
their  attention  from  their  common  foe.  This  respite, 
however,  was  destined  to  be  of  short  duration.  The  full 
fierceness  of  the  tempest  was  yet  to  be  felt  ere  the 
horizon  cleared. 


THE  INTERREGNUM,  397 


CHAPTEE  XY. 

%^t  Interregnum. 

A.D.  1649-1660. 

Independents  in  the  ascendant — Character  of  this  sect — The  "  Engagement "  sub- 
stituted for  the  Covenant— Rise  of  strange  and  immoral  sects — The  Anglicans 
excluded  from  toleration — Yet  the  clergy  continue  to  officiate — Appointment  of 
the  "  Triers  " — Cromwell's  unsuccessful  overtures — The  clergy  driven  from  their 
employments — The  Anglican  system  kept  alive  by  courageous  Churchmen — 
The  period  of  anarchy — The  Restoration. 

The    five    years   succeeding   the    execution    of    King 
Charles   form   a   period  of  wild  religious  anarchy,  of 
which  it  will  be  unnecessary  to  give  a  detailed  account,  indepen- 
The  predominant  sect  was  that  of  the  Brownists  or^,®'^*^^^ 

•■■  tne  ascen- 

Independents,  deriving  its  origin  from  the  Elizabethan  dant. 
fanatic  Eobert  Brown.     The  anti-Church  principles  at 
one   time  held   by  Brown   had   been  worked  up  into 
a  system,  which  professedly  made  each  congregation  a 
law    to    itself.      Hence    the    assumption  of  the   titles 
"  Independents  "  and  "  Congregationalists."    This  form 
of  sectarianism  had  been  fostered  by  the  outcry  against 
"prelacy"    and    "  Arminianism "    in     the    reigns    of 
James  and  Charles.     It  was  distinguished   by  a  ran- 
corous hatred  of  all  other  systems  ;  and  was  scarcely  less 
savagely  hostile  to  the  Presbyterians  and  Quakers  than 
to  the  Anglicans  and  Eomanists.     The  Independents,  character 
who  had  been  forced  to  leave  England  in  the  reign  ^f  °^*^^ss^'=t- 
James,  carried  this  intolerance  with  them  to  Yirgima,  /^hm»l</^ 


398 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


The  "En- 


substituted 
for  the 
Covenant. 


and,  by  their  cruelties  to  the  other  religionists,  kept 
up  the  illiberal  spirit  of  the  Middle  Ages  long  after 
the  principles  of  religious  tolerance  had  found  general 
acceptance  in  England.^  The  present  time,  however, 
was  hardly  suitable  for  religious  persecution,  and  the 
regime  of  the  Independents  was,  until  1655,  less 
oppressive  than  that  of  the  Presbyterians.  One  great 
fuhSitu^e'd  l^o^n  to  the  Church  was  the  substitution  of  a  political 
test  in  the  place  of  the  odious  Presbyterian  Covenant. 
Within  a  week  after  Charles's  execution,  the  "Rump" 
had  decreed  that  the  House  of  Lords  was  "useless  and 
dangerous,"  and  the  office  of  king  "  unnecessary,  bur- 
densome, and  dangerous."  The  clergy  were  summoned 
to  sign  the  "  Engagement,"  which  pledged  them  to 
accept  this  mutilation  of  the  constitution,  and  to  recog- 
nize the  authority  of  the  "  Eump."  This  was,  at  all 
events,  better  than  enforced  repudiation  of  the  Church's 
system,  and  many  clergy  who  thought  the  cause  of 
the  Stuart  family  hopeless  signed  the  "  Engagement." 

As  a  natural  consequence  of  the  suspension  of  estab- 
lished religion,  a  hydra-headed  sectarianism  infested  the 
land,  and  the  most  absurd  and  immoral  systems  claimed 
the  sanction  of  Christianity  and  succeeded  in  gaining 

^  The  disorderly  and  scurrilous  "  Independents  "  who  eniigrated  in  the  Mayflower 
in  1620  have  been  sometimes  regarded  as  the  victims  of  ecclesiastical  tyranny 
and  the  friends  of  religious  freedom.  The  true  claimants  for  such  sympathy  are 
rather  the  Roman  Catholics,  Baptists,  Quakers,  and  Unitarians,  who  form(>d  the 
minority  in  the  settlement.  The  ecclesiastical  tyranny  these  religionists  wiithed 
under  was  that  of  the  "  I'ilgrim  Fathers,"  or  Independent  majority.  They  were 
subjected  to  every  form  of  cruelly.  The  law  of  1656  concerning  Quakers  ordered 
that  every  Quaker  who  landed  should  be  whipped,  imprisoned  with  hard  labour, 
and  finally  expelled  from  the  colony.  The  Romanists  were  also  expelled.  The 
Unitarians  were  executed.  The  Baptists  were  harassed  by  various  rigorous  statutes. 
The  "sabbath-breaker"  was  to  suffer  capital  punishment.  When  we  read  of  three 
Quaker  women  being  flogged  through  eleven  villages  in  frost  and  snow,  of  ship 
captains  being  flogged  fur  happening  to  bring  Quakers  into  port,  and  of  numerous 
colonists  being  hanged  on  allegations  of  sorcery  and  blasphemj-,  we  may  well 
hesitate  before  we  associate  the  cause  of  the  "Pilgrim  Fathers"  with  that  of 
freedom  of  conscience.  (See  Curteis'  "  Dissent  in  its  relation  to  the  Church," 
pp.  82,  83.) 


Else  of 

strang-e 

and 

immoral 

sects. 


THE  INTERREGNUM.  399 

followers.  The  least  pernicious  of  the  new  formations, 
probably,  though  the  one  most  disliked  by  Cromwell, 
was  the  Quaker  sect,  the  disciples  of  George  Fox,  an 
enthusiast  who  taught  a  doctrine  of  internal  illumina- 
tion akin  to  that  of  the  mediaeval  mysticists.  The 
best  known  of  the  other  sects  are  the  Vanists,  Fifth 
Monarchists,  Seekers,  Eanters,  Familists,  and  Beh- 
menists.  The  tendency  of  the  teaching  of  the  sectaries 
is  sufficiently  illustrated  by  an  Act  passed  in  August, 
1650.  This  inflicted  sentence  on  all  who  should  pro- 
fess "  that  the  acts  of  adultery,  drunkenness,  swearing, 
etc.,  are  in  their  own  nature  as  holy  and  righteous  as 
the  duties  of  prayer,  preaching,  or  giving  thanks  to 
God  ;  that  there  is  really  no  such  thing  as  unrighteous- 
ness or  sin  independent  of  conscience  and  opinion;  that 
there  is  neither  heaven  nor  hell,  etc."  ^ 

The  new  constitution,  forcibly  introduced  by  Crom-  The 
well  in  December,  1653,  classed  Anglicans  and  Roman-  ^cfideS^ 
ists  and  teachers  of  licentiousness  as  undeserving  of  the  toleration 
toleration  extended  to  every  form  of  religious  opinion. 
Things,  however,  were  in  too  confused  a  state  to  admit 
of  an   organized   persecution  of  faithful    Churchmen. 
Many  clergy  who  had  signed  the  "  Engagement "  had 
contrived  to  regain  a  footing,  and  now  celebrated  the 
rites  of  the   Church  without  molestation.     To  secure 
themselves  against  the  statute  of  August,  1645,  they 
sometimes  repeated  the  Offices  without  book,  or  adopted 
variations  closely  resembling  the  proscribed  formulee. 
At  S.  Gregory's,  near  S.  Paul's,  the  Anglican  form  of  Yet  the 
worship  appears  to  have  been  conducted  in  the  usual  f.iergycon- 

-^       '■  '•  tmue  to 

way  till  Christmas  Da}^  1655,  when  Dr.  Wild  delivered  officiate, 
what  Evelyn  calls  "  the  funeral  sermon  of  preaching." 
Evelyn  mentions  a  few  other  churches  where  ordained 

'  Collier,  Ecclesiastical  History,  vol.  ix.  p.  378. 


400 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


Croni"weirs 
unsuccess- 
ful over- 
tures. 


clergymen  were  to  be  found  in  the  years  1652-53. 
The  first  blow  struck  at  this  remnant  of  the  priesthood 
was  the  establishment  of  an  inquisitorial  commission, 
called  "  Triers,"  in  March,  1654.  The  new  regime 
had  become  hateful,  and  it  was  thought  wise  to  "  tune 
the  pulpits."  An  ordinance  was  accordingly  issued, 
complaining  that  the  ministry  contained  still  many 
"  weak,  scandalous,  popish,  and  ill-affected  persons." 
Thirty-five  commissioners  were  named,  who  were  to 
test  both  the  political  views  and  the  spiritual  exj)e- 
riences  of  all  occupants  of  pulpits.  Five  Triers  were 
empowered  to  approve,  and  nine  to  reject.  One  of  the 
most  active  Triers  was  a  very  immoral  actor,  named 
Hugh  Peters,  who  professed  to  have  experienced  a  call, 
and  now  conducted  himself  with  intolerable  insolence. 
The  state  of  the  soul,  the  date  of  "conversion,"  the 
"  assurance "  of  the  converted  person — these  and 
similar  secrets  of  the  inner  life  were  to  be  laid  bare 
before  the  Puritan  confessional.  It  may  be  imagined 
what  kind  of  persons  earned  its  testamur. 

Severer  measures  were  yet  to  be  inflicted.  It  appears 
that  about  this  time  the  hostile  attitude  of  the  Presby- 
terians induced  Cromwell  to  make  some  advances  to 
Usher,  Brownrigg,  and  other  leading  clergy.  But  the 
persistent  loyalty  of  the  Anglicans  to  the  Stuart  cause 
soon  convinced  him  that  a  conciliatory  policy  would  be 
fruitless.  The  Protector  vented  his  feelings  of  disap- 
pointment and  anger  in  the  cruel  edict  of  November  24, 
1655.  This  prohibited  the  employment  of  all  ministers, 
fellows,  or  schoolmasters  who  had  experienced  eject- 
ment or  sequestration.  No  such  persons  were  to  engage 
in  tuition,  serve  as  chaplains,  preach,  or  administer  the 
sacraments.  This  vindictive  measure  was  designed  to 
ruin  those  ejected  clergy  who  had  hitherto  supported 


THE  INTERREGNUM.  401 

themselves  as  chaplains  and  private  tutors  in  the  chap. 
royalist  households.  It  also  drove  from  their  cures  ^^' 
many  who  had  been  restored  by  the  action  of  their 
parishioners.  The  same  edict  re-enforced  the  pro- 
scription of  the  Liturgy,  and  altered  the  penalty  from 
a  fine  to  imprisonment.  In  every  distiict  commissioners 
were  appointed  to  enforce  these  provisions. 

This  must  have  been  the  darkest  hour  in  the  whole  The 
period    of    persecution.      Much,    however,    was    done  ^^femkept 
secretly   by   munificent   Churchmen    to   diminish   the^^^^®^^ 

«/         •^  courageous 

sufferings  of  the  destitute  clergy.  Even  now  such  churcii- 
men  as  Hammond  and  Sheldon  were  securing  the  con- 
tinuance of  a  learned  ministry  by  providing  for  the 
education  of  young  men  of  promise.  These  obtained 
ordination  from  Bishop  Skinner  at  Launton,  or  Bishop 
Duppa  at  Richmond,  or  from  refugee  diocesans  on  the 
Continent.  The  services  of  our  Church  were  now 
usually  conducted  in  private  chambers.  Some  of  the 
priesthood,  however,  still  openly  performed  the  duties 
to  which  they  had  been  ordained,  in  defiance  of  un- 
righteous edicts.  As  late  as  Christmas  Day,  1657, 
Evelyn  was  present  at  a  celebration  of  Holy  Com- 
munion in  Exeter  Chapel,  London,  which  was  inter- 
rupted by  an  invasion  of  soldiery. 

The  odious  rule  of  Puritanism  practically  collapsed  sept.  3, 
on  the  death  of  Cromwell.     The  removal  of  that  "  iron  ^Ife^period 
hand  which  had  prevented  the  various  sects  of  fanatics  °^  anarchy, 
from  tearing  each  other  in  pieces,"  was  succeeded  by 
an  outburst  of  anarchy,  which  compelled  the  Presby- 
terians to  range  themselves  on  the  side  of  the  loyalists. 
After  Monk's  resuscitation  of  the  "  Long  Parliament," 
there  was  a  brief  period  of  suspense.     The  re-establish- 
ment of  Presbyterianism  was,  of  course,  desired  by  this 
assembly.     Its  tenets  were  declared  to  be  the  national 

2  D 


402 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


CHAP,  faith,  and  it  was  ordered  that  copies  of  the  Covenant 
-^7'.  should  be  hung  up  in  all  churches.  The  nation,  how- 
ever, was  thoroughly  sick  of  the  hypocrisy  and  inso- 
lence of  the  sectarian  systems,  and  longed  for  the 
The  Resto-  rc-establishment  of  Church  and  king.  Monk,  the  pro- 
fessed leader  of  Presbyterians,  had  sufficient  sagacity  to 
read  the  signs  of  the  times.  He  turned  traitor  to  his 
party,  and  undertook  to  establish  Charles  uncon- 
ditionally. The  king  issued  the  "  Declaration  of 
Breda,"  promising  pardon  to  those  concerned  in  the 
rebellion,  and  toleration  "  of  differences  of  opinion  in 
matters  of  religion."  A  universal  ebullition  of  joy 
marked  the  restoration  of  the  constitution,  and  the 
re-establishment  of  the  Church  in  that  position  from 
which  she  had  been  illegally  deposed. 


ration. 


Mayl, 
1660. 


CHARLES  IL  403 


CHAPTEE  XYI. 
©I^arlcg  ft 

A.D.  1660-1685. 

The  Puritan  deputation  to  the  Hague — The  petition  for  alterations  in  the  Church 
system — Reform  of  the  episcopal  system  :  how  far  desirable — The  Presbyterian 
proposal  on  the  subject — The  "  Worcester  House  Declaration  " — Rejected  by  the 
"  Convention  Parliament " — Appointment  of  the  Savoy  Conference — The  policy  of 
the  bishops — Baxter's  "  Reformed  Liturgy  "—The  "  Petition  to  the  Bishops — The 
eight  grievances  of  the  Puritans — The  conference  fruitless — Jealous  conservatism 
of  the  Parliament — Convocation  charged  to  review  the  Prayer-book— Valuable 
services  of  Cosin— The  revised  Prayer-book  sanctioned  by  an  "  Act  of  Uniformity  " 
— The  Catholic  party  victorious — The  usurping  incumbents — "  Black  Bartholo- 
mew's "—The  Anglican  revival — The  clergy  resign  their  right  of  taxing  them- 
selves in  Convocation — The  political  relations  of  the  Church  from  1660  to  1672 — 
And  from  1672  to  1685 — Charles  coquets  with  the  Dissenters — And  rouses  the 
indignation  of  the  Commons — The  Acts  for  repressing  nonconformity — The  "  De- 
claration of  Indulgence  "  — The  Commons  co-operate  with  the  Dissenters  against 
the  Romanists — The  "Test  Act" — Persecution  of  Romanists — James  supported 
by  the  bishops— Discoveries  of  plots— Prevalence  of  immorality — The  age  of 
great  divines — Rise  of  the  Latitudinarians. 


The  Presbyterian  divines  were  slow  to  appreciate  the  The 

Puri 
&     deputation 
to  the 
Hague. 


marked  reaction  against  Puritanism  and  all  its  belong- 
ings. Some  ten  of  their  party,  including  Eeynolds,  *°*^e 
Calam}^  Case,  and  Manton,  had  waited  on  Charles  II. 
at  the  Hague,  and  demanded  toleration  for  their  system. 
Charles,  with  consummate  tact,  quoted  their  own 
principle  that  the  Houses  of  Parliament  were  "  the 
best  judges  what  indulgence  and  toleration  was 
necessary  for  the  repose  of  the  kingdom."  When 
these  divines  proceeded  to  press  him  to  prohibit  his 
chaplains  from  wearing  the  surplice,   he  replied  that 


404 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


CHAP. 

XVI. 


The 

petition  for 
alterations 
in  the 
Church 
system. 


Reform 
of  the 
episcopal 
system: 
how  far 
desirable. 


personally  lie  claimed  the  same  liberty  in  matters  of 
religion  as  themselves.  The  unpopularity  of  this  party 
was,  however,  as  yet  indiscernible  to  the  king,  and  he 
appears  to  have  thought  that  large  concessions  would 
be  necessary.  To  secure  its  goodwill  he  made  nine 
of  the  leading  Presbyterian  divines  royal  chaplains. 
Thus  encouraged,  the  Puritans  proceeded  to  draw  up 
a  petition  for  sweeping  changes  in  the  Prayer-book 
and  the  ecclesiastical  constitution.  They  demanded 
that  the  prayers  should  be  recast  in  Scripture  phrase- 
ology ;  that  oaths  of  conformity  should  not  be  required 
of  the  clergy ;  that  such  ceremonies  as  wearing  the 
surplice,  signing  with  the  cross  at  Baptism,  and  bowing 
at  the  name  of  our  Saviour,  should  be  discontinued ; 
and  that  communicants  should  not  be  required  to 
kneel. 

Coupled  with  these  stereotyped  Puritan  requisitions 
was  a  less  exceptionable  demand  for  a  reform  of  the 
episcopate.  We  have  pointed  out  that  the  Eeformation 
settlement  had  so  far  tended  to  an  undue  aggrandize- 
ment of  the  first  order  of  clergy,  in  respect  of  eccle- 
siastical powers  and  social  status.  The  episcopate 
had  been  left  independent  of  the  priesthood,  and  was 
empowered  to  rule  without  deference  to  synods.  Its 
members  were  too  few  in  number,  even  for  the  present 
population.  The  bishops  might  easily  become  an  aris- 
tocratic caste,  devoted  to  theories  of  secular  policy, 
rather  than  to  the  work  of  superintending  Christ's 
Church ;  "  lords  over  God's  heritage,"  rather  than 
"  examples  to  the  flock."  A  similar  exaltation  of  the 
episcopate,  at  the  expense  of  the  other  clerical  orders, 
has  been  noticed  among  tiie  abuses  of  the  prse-Reforma- 
tion  period,  and  indeed  lay  at  the  ver}^  root  of  the 
mediaeval  theory  of  papal  supremacy.     The  survival  of 


CHARLES  11.  405 

a    secularized    and   autocratic   episcopate    bad    given      chap. 
offence   in   the   recent   reigns  to  many^  who  had  no       ^^}' 
objection  to  bishops  in  their  legitimate  capacity.     It 
was  destined  to  become  a  stereotyped  abuse,  and  to  sap 
the  Church's  vitality  for  many  years  to  come. 

The    Presbyterians   proposed   a   scheme   of    reform  Ti^e  Pres- 
which  might  well  have  received  more  favourable  con-  p^Jos^  on 
sideration  at  the  subsequent  settlement.     They  were  ^^®^^^^®°*' 
prepared  to  acknowledge  episcopacy,  but  the  power  of 
the   bishops  was  to  be  limited  by  provisions  akin  to 
those  recently  suggested  by  Archbishop  Usher.^     They 
desired  "  the  true  primitive  presidency  in  the  Church, 
with  a  due  mixture  of  presbyters."     They  objected  to 
"  the   great  extent  of  the    bishop's  diocese ;  their  de- 
puting commissaries,  chancellors,  and  officials  to  act  in 
their  stead ;  their  assuming  the  sole  power  of  ordina- 
tion^ and  jurisdiction,   and   acting   so   arbitrarily  in 

1  The  feeling  on  this  subject  is  illustrated  by  Lord  Falkland's  speech  in  Parlia- 
ment in  1641.  Falkland  defended  the  episcopal  system,  but  argued  that  the 
modern  bishops  had  only  opposed  the  Papacy  beyond  the  seas  that  they  might 
establish  one  at  home.  "  If,"  he  continues,  "  their  temporal  title,  power,  and 
employment  appear  likely  to  distract  them  from  the  care  of,  or  make  them  look 
down  upon,  their  spiritual  duty,  and  the  too  great  distance  between  them  and  those 
they  govern  will  hinder  the  free  and  fit  recourse  of  their  inferiors  to  them,  and 
occasion  insolence  from  them  to  their  inferiors,  let  that  be  considered  and  cared 
for.  I  am  sure  neither  their  lordships,  their  judging  of  tithes,  wills,  and  mar- 
riages, etc.,  nor  their  voices  in  Parliament,  are  jure  divino,  and  I  am  sure  that 
these  titles  and  this  power  are  not  necessary  to  their  authority,"  etc. 

=  Usher's  scheme  of  reform  is  propounded  in  the  interesting  tract  entitled 
"  Episcopal  and  Presbyterial  Government  conjoined,"  first  printed  in  1679.  This 
was  after  the  archbishop's  death,  and  it  has  been  questioned  whether  he  intended 
the  tract  for  publication  in  its  present  form.  Usher  argues  that  in  the  early  times, 
"  with  the  bishop,  who  was  the  chief  president,  ...  the  rest  of  the  dispensers  of  the 
Word  and  Sacraments  joined  in  the  common  government  of  the  Church."  He 
proposes  the  re-establishment  of  the  "  synodical  conventions  of  the  pastors  of 
every  parish,"  under  the  presidency  of  suffragan  bishops.  Besides  these  diocesan 
synods,  he  provides  for  provincial  synods,  to  which  the  clergy  are  to  send  repre- 
sentatives.    Disputed  questions  at  these  synods  are  to  be  settled  by  a  majority  vote. 

^  This  allegation  may  have  rested  on  some  misunderstanding  of  the  Anglican 
use.  The  Prayer-books  of  1549,  1552,  1559,  and  1604  all  contain  the  present 
rubric,  which  directs  that  such  priests  as  are  present  shall  join  with  the  bishop  in 
laying  hands  on  the  candidate  for  the  priesthood. 


4o6  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

CHAP,     visitation  articles."     The  remedies  suggested  were  the 
■  ^  ,  '■ .     appointment    of    suffragans,    to   be    chosen   by   their 
respective    synods,    and   the    limitation   of    episcopal 
autocracy  by  synodical  action. 

Whether  any  insidious  design  against  episcopacy 
itself  was  veiled  under  these  moderate  demands,  cannot 
now  be  ascertained.  As  they  stand,  they  appear 
consistent  with  the  theory  of  ecclesiastical  organization 
accepted  in  the  early  ages.  Had  they  been  more 
favourably  received,  the  Church  would  have,  perhaps, 
escaped  the  paralj^zing  influences  of  the  Georgian 
period,  with  its  secularized  bishops,  Erastian  opinions, 
and  repudiation  of  the  rights  of  Convocation.  But  the 
recent  cruelties  of  triumphant  Presbyterianism  still 
rankled  in  men's  minds,  and  the  hour  of  restoration  was 
not  the  time  for  impugning  autocracy,  whether  royal 
The  or    episcopal.       Charles,    indeed,    still   overrating   the 

Hous^e  ^^  ^'  strength  of  the  Puritan  faction,  ordered  Clarendon  to 
Son."'^'      draw  up  the  markedly  concessory  document,  known  as 
Oct.  25.       w^Q   "  Worcester  House   Declaration."     This  not  only 
promised  a  large  increase  of  the   episcopate,  and  an 
admission  of  priests  to  certain  departments  of  diocesan 
jurisdiction,   but  held  out  hopes   of  a  review  of  the 
Liturgy.     For   the  present  it  allowed  disuse  of  such 
prayers  and  ceremonies   of  the  Prayer-book   as   indi- 
vidual ministers  might  object  to.^     It  has  been  sup- 
posed, however,  that  Clarendon  of  set  purpose  intro- 
duced into  the  Declaration  more  concessions  than  the 
Rejected      "  Convention  Parliament  "  would  be  likely  to  allow.  At 
V.^co^ven-    Q-iiy  rate,  it  was  rejected  in  the  Commons  by  a  majority 
ment^^^^^^  of  twcnty-six.      The  king,  nevertheless,  considered  it 
March  25,    politic  to  appoint  a  commission,  to  consider  the  demerits 
of  the  Prayer-book,  in  accordance  with  the  promise  of 

1  Collier,  Eccles.  Hist.,  vol.  viii.  pp.  412,  seqq. 


CHARLES  II.  407 

the  Declaration.     The  royal  warrant  was  addressed  to      chap. 


XVI. 


twelve  bishops  and  twelve  Presbyterian  divines,  nine 
supernnmeraries  being  allowed  on  each  side.     The  con-  "^3^°^^^ ^j^e 
ference  was  to  meet  at  the  Bishop  of  London's  lodgings  savoy  con- 

ference. 

in  the  Savoy.  Its  sessions  might  extend  over  lour 
months  from  the  day  of  opening  (April  15). 

The  "  Caroline  "  episcopate  already  included  some  of 
its  immortal  names.  Nine  bishops  had  survived  the 
interregnum.  Of  these  the  aged  Juxon,  who  had  at- 
tended King  Charles  in  his  last  moments,  was  appointed 
to  the  primacy,  which  had  been  vacant  since  the  death 
of  Laud.  Among  the  newly  appointed  bishops  were 
Cosin,  the  celebrated  liturgiologist ;  Sanderson,  emi- 
nent as  a  theologian  and  casuist ;  Ganden,  who  had 
published  the  "  Eikon  Basilike  "  and  "  The  Appeal  to 
Cromwell ; "  and  Walton,  the  laborious  editor  of  the 
Polyglot  Bible.  Three  eminent  Puritans,  Calamy, 
Baxter,  and  Eeynolds,  had  also  been  offered  bishoprics, 
but  Eejaiolds  was  the  only  one  of  the  three  whose 
conscience  permitted  him  to  conform  and  accept  the 
preferment.  All  these  persons  took  part  in  the  present 
Conference.^ 

The  Savoy  Conference  is  important  as  paving  the 
way  for  that  work  of  liturgical  review  which  gave  our 
Church  her  present  Prayer-book,  and  which  may  be 
justly  regarded  as  the  terminus  of  the  English  Ee- 
formation.  Archbishop  Juxon  was  precluded  by  age 
and  infirmity  from  taking  an  active  part  in  the  con- 

'  The  commissioners  for  the  Church  were  Archbishop  Frewen  and  Bishops 
Sheldon,  Cosin,  Sterne,  Brj-an  Walton,  King,  Gauden,  Sanderson,  Lanej%  Warner, 
Henchman,  Morley.  The  nine  assisting  commissioners  were  Doctors  Barwick, 
Earlo,  Gunning,  Racket,  Heylin,  Pearson,  Pierce,  Sparrow,  and  Mr.  Thorndike. 
The  Puritan  commissioners  were  Bishop  Reynolds ;  Doctors  Conant,  Marston,  Spen- 
stow,  Tuckney,  and  Wallis ;  and  Messrs.  Baxter,  Calamy,  Case,  Clark,  Jackson,  and 
Newcomen.  These  were  assisted  by  Doctors  Bates,  Collins,  Cooper,  Horton, 
Jacomb,  and  Lightfoot,  and  Messrs.  Drake,  Rawlinson,  and  Woodbridj;e. 


4o8 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


CHAP. 
XVI. 


The  policy 
of  the 
bishops. 


Baxter's 

"Reformecl 

Ijiturgy," 


ference  or  the  subsequent  sessions  of  Convocation. 
Frewen,  the  northern  primate,  took  his  place  as 
president;  Sheldon,  Bishop  of  London,  however,  was 
the  working  leader  of  the  Anglican  commissioners. 
What  the  bishops  really  desired  was  a  more  emphatic 
assertion  of  those  Catholic  principles  which  one  school 
of  Eeformers  had  always  faithfully  maintained,  and 
which  had  been  the  mainstay  and  comfort  of  all  faithful 
Churchmen  throughout  the  period  of  persecution.  This 
result  was  actually  obtained  at  the  subsequent  revision. 
The  bishops  were,  however,  content  with  the  Prayer- 
book  as  it  stood,  provided  it  was  protected  against 
future  assaults  of  Puritanism.  Sheldon  was  not  slow 
to  appreciate  the  strength  of  his  position.  He  wisely 
drew  the  enemy's  fire  on  the  first  day  of  the  con- 
ference, by  demanding  that  the  Puritans  should  state 
their  objections  to  the  Liturgy.  The  first  response  to 
this  request  was  made  a  fortnight  later,  by  the  cele- 
brated Baxter,^  who  had  spent  this  his  time  in  composing 
a  "  Eeformed  Liturgy,"  in  Scripture  phrase,  which  he 
coolly  laid  before  the  meeting  as  a  proper  substitute 
for  our  Prayer-book. 

The  other  Puritan  divines  were  meanwhile  occupied 


1  This  remarkable  person  had  been  ordained  in  1638,  and  appointed  to  the 
vicarage  of  Kidderminster.  As  he  declared  in  1660  that  he  accepted  all  the 
doctrinal  part  of  the  Prayer-book,  it  must  be  supposed  that  he  joined  the  revolu- 
tionary party  from  dislike  of  the  Church's  ritual.  He  appears  to  have  been 
staggered  by  the  overthrow  of  the  monarchy,  and  expressed  his  views  on  the 
subject  somewhat  plainly  to  Cromwell.  He  kept  on  good  terms,  however,  with 
the  Piump,  and  held  a  chaplaincy  in  Colonel  Whalley's  regiment  till  1657.  At  the 
Caroline  settlement  he  exhibited  a  more  intolerant  and  uncompromising  temper 
than  most  of  his  Puritan  brethren.  Persisting  in  nonconformity,  he  was  com- 
pelled to  vacate  his  living  at  Kidderminster.  He  was  twice  imprisoned  under  the 
Acts  for  suppression  of  dissent,  and  both  times  liberated  on  an  informality.  During 
King  James's  phase  of  antagonism  towards  Dissenters,  Baxter  was  arrested  on  a 
charge  of  sedition,  brow-beatrn  by  Judge  Jeffreys,  and  put  in  prison  for  eighteen 
months.  Baxter  is  distinguished  as  an  author  of  treatises  on  religious  "  experience," 
and  bis  "Saint's  Everlasting  Rest  "  and  "Call  to  the  Unconverted"  are  still  held 
in  estimation. 


CHARLES  11.  409 

in  drawing  up  a  less  pretentions  document,  containing 
a  catalogue  of  definite  objections  to  the  Prayer-book.^ 
This  was  presented  in  the  form  of  a  "  Petition  to  the  The 

••T'T  IT  •  "  Petition 

bishops. '     The  petition  elicited  a  reply,  defending  most  to  the 
of  the   points   attacked,  but  also  otfering  a  few  con- 
cessions of  small  importance.     The  reply  drew  more 
writing  from  the  voluminous  Baxter.     Time  was  thus 
frittered  away  ;    and  only  ten  days  were  left   of  the 
appointed  four  months,  when  it  was  decided  that  there 
should  be  a  formal  viva  voce  discussion  of  the  points  at 
issue.     The  Anglicans  wisely  maintained  the  position 
that  it  was  incumbent  on  the  Puritan  delegates  to  state 
their   case    against    the    Liturgy.      Three    disputants 
were  chosen  on  each  side,  and  the  Puritans  were  invited 
by  Bishop  Cosin  to  declare  what  they  considered  sinful 
and   what    inexpedient   in   the    Church    system.      The 
student  will  probably  be  satisfied  with  an  enumeration 
of  the  eight  points  which  the  Puritans  denounced  as 
*'  sinful"  and  "  contrary  to  the  Word  of  God."     These  meeigM 
were— (1)  The  surplice;  (2)  The  cross  in  Baptism;  (3)  ST™""^^ 
Calling  all  baptized  persons  regenerate;  (4)  Kneeling  ^"^'"^^■ 
at  the  Lord's  Supper;    (5)  Administering   the  Sacra- 
ment to  the  impenitent  and  the  sick ;    (6)  The  Abso- 
lution ;    (7)  Returning  thanks  indiscriminately  for  all 
departed  Christians  in   the   Burial  Service;    (8)  Sub- 
scription  to   the   Book   of  Common    Prayer    and    the 
Thirty-nine  Articles.     The  Churchmen  were  unable  to  The 
regard  these  things  as  sinful  or  unscriptural,  and  the  fruitless. 

•  They  urge  that  as  the  earlier  reformers  had  made  concessions  to  the  "  papists," 
so  now  the  way  to  conformity  ought  to  be  made  smooth  for  Protestants.  They 
object  to  congregational  prayers,  saints'  days,  observance  of  Lent,  the  assumption 
that  tlie  Church  is  a  congregation  of  regenerate  persons,  the  use  of  the  term 
"  priest,"  and  the  survival  in  the  Epistles  and  Gospels  of  some  translations  differing 
from  the  version  of  16U.  They  desire  that  the  minister  may  be  at  liberty  to  sub- 
stitute prayers  of  his  own  composition  for  part  of  the  Liturgy,  also  that  the  Old 
Testament  Apocrypha  may  not  be  read :  see  Collier,  vol.  viii.  pp.  421-425. 


4IO 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


Zealous 
conserva- 
tism of  the 
Parlia- 
ment. 


July  9. 


Convoca- 
tion 

charg-ed  to 
1- evie\y  the 
Prayer- 
book. 


Valuable 
services  of 
Cosin. 


term  fixed  for  its  dissolution  having  arrived,  tlie  Savoy 
Conference  closed  without  practical  result. 

It  may  indeed  be  doubted  whether  the  country  would 
have  tolerated  any  important  concessions  to  Puritanism. 
The  new  Parliament  was  in  no  mood  to  treat  noncon- 
formist susceptibilities  with  tenderness.  It  had  for- 
bidden petitions  for  alterations  in  Church  matters  that 
had  not  the  sanction  of  three  justices  of  the  peace,  and 
it  allowed  none  but  communicants  to  be  members  of  the 
House.  To  provide  against  possible  half-heartedness 
on  the  part  of  the  bishops,  it  now  passed  an  "  Act  of 
Uniformity  "  enforcing  the  use  of  the  Liturgy  of  1604. 

But  a  more  satisfactory  settlement  of  the  Puritan 
controversy  was  impending.  Convocation  had  hitherto 
been  occupied  with  a  review  of  the  Canons  of  1604  and 
1640,  and  the  formation  of  the  offices  for  the  30th  of 
January  and  29th  of  May.  But  in  October  Juxon 
received  royal  letters  directing  that  the  Houses  of  his 
province  should  proceed  to  make  a  review  of  the  Pra3'er- 
book.  Archbishop  Frewen  received  a  similar  mandate 
in  November.  The  northern  Houses  agreed  to  send 
delegates  to  the  Canterbury  Convocation,  and  the  latter 
put  the  business  in  the  hands  of  a  committee  of  eight 
bishops,^  whose  work  was  laid  before  the  Houses  as 
it  proceeded.  For  the  important  and  valuable  altera- 
tions now  made  in  the  Liturgy  we  are  doubtless  in- 
debted mainly  to  Bishop  Cosin,^  The  Puritan  Baxter 
had   composed   a   brand-new  Prayer-book  in   fourteen 


'  These  bishops  were  Cosin  of  Durham,  Wren  of  Ely,  Skinner  of  Oxford, 
Warner  of  Rochester,  Henchman  of  Salisbury,  IMorley  of  Worcester,  Sanderson  of 
Lincoln,  and  Nicholson  of  Gloucester.  Robert  Pory,  John  Pearson,  and  Anthony 
Sparrowe  were  admitted  as  delegates  fi'om  the  Lower  House  towards  the  close  of 
the  proceedings. 

'^  Mr.  Parker  calculates  that  probably  "  not  more  than  ten  out  of  every  hundred  " 
alterations  suggested  in  Cosin's  annotated  Prayer-book  were  rejected  by  the  com- 
mittee.—Introduction  to  the  Revisions,  p.  ccccxxxvi. 


CHARLES  11.  411 

days ;  the  less  ambitious  Cosin  had  been  labouring  chap. 
for  forty  years  in  collecting  and  collating  the  materials  -^J^-  . 
for  a  revision.  His  annotated  Prayer-Books  now  sup- 
plied the  reviewers  with  ample  resources.  How  ex- 
haustive this  review  was  may  be  gathered  from  the 
fact  that  the  alterations  made  were  no  less  than  six 
hundred  in  number.  Most  of  these  were  of  no  doctrinal 
significance.  Certainly  none  of  them  can  be  regarded 
as  concessions  to  the  Precisian  faction.  The  import- 
ance of  those  which  bear  on  the  Offices  for  Holy  Com- 
munion and  Baptism  ^  will  be  appreciated  when  we 
recollect  what  was  the  Puritan  doctrine  on  the  subject 
of  sacramental  grace. 

The  new  Prayer-book  was  detained  for  two  months 
by  the  king  and  Council.     Some  fresh  alterations  were  The 
now  made  and  submitted  to  the  approval  of  Convoca-  prayer- 
tion.^     When   it   had   received    the   final   sanction    of  g ^^^.^ioj^etj 
royalty,  it  was  submitted  to  the  Lords,  who  voted  that  of^^fo^^^ 
the  recent  "Act  of  Uniformity"  should  be  construed  as  "^i*'''',^ 

•^  _  Marcli  17, 

applying  to  this  Prayer-book.  Thence  it  went  to  the  1662. 
Commons,  where  all  the  alterations  were  accepted  with- 
out debate.  The  last  "Act  for  the  Uniformity  ofM:ayi9. 
Public  Praj^ers  and  the  Administration  of  the  Sacra- 
ments" was  now  passed.  By  this  Act  every  parson, 
vicar,  and  curate  was  ordered  to  testify  his  acceptance 
of  the  new  Prayer-book  before  S.  Bartholomew's  Day 

'  See  pp.  237,  238.  Besides  the  important  changes  there  enumerated  we  may- 
notice  the  following  features  in  the  revision  of  1661-62.  The  five  praj'ers  which 
follow  the  third  Collect  in  the  Morning  and  Evening  Services  had  stood  hitherto  at 
the  end  of  the  Litany.  These  were  moved  to  their  present  position.  The  prayers 
for  the  Ember  Weeks,  for  Parliament,  for  all  Conditions  of  Men,  and  for  Restoring 
Public  Peace  at  Home  were  now  introduced,  as  also  the  General  Thanksgiving.  A 
few  new  collects  were  introduced,  and  some  collects  already  existent  were  slightly 
altered.  The  Baptismal  Service  for  those  of  Riper  Years,  and  the  forms  for  the 
5th  of  November,  the  30th  of  January,  and  the  29th  of  May,  were  inserted  at  this 
revision. 

^  On  these  alterations  see  Parker,  Introduction  to  Revisions,  pp.  ccccxxxiv.  seqq. 


412 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


CHAP. 
XVI. 


The 

Catholic 
party 
victorioiis. 


The 

usurping 
incumbents 
resign. 


"Black 
Bartholo- 
mew's." 


(Aug.  24),  on  pain  of  ejectment.  All  who  had  not  been 
properly  ordained  were  to  obtain  ordination  from  their 
diocesans  before  this  date.^ 

Such  was  the  issue  of  the  struggle  that  had  been 
raging  ever  since  the  accession  of  Elizabeth.  The 
impolitic  conduct  of  the  Puritans  had  supplied  the 
Anglican  party  with  the  weapons  which  had  won  them 
the  victory.  They  had  appealed  for  a  final  settlement 
of  the  Liturgical  controversy.  The  verdict  was  given 
when  the  Caroline  Prayer-book,  with  its  concessions  to 
the  Auglo-Catholic  school,  was  cheerfully  accepted  by 
the  Church,  the  king,  and  the  Parliament. 

About  a  thousand  of  the  persecuted  incumbents  had 
survived  the  interregnum,  and  been  restored  to  their 
benefices  by  an  Act  passed  at  the  beginning  of  the 
reign.  There  still  remained,  however,  a  large  number 
of  usurping  nonconformists  of  divers  persuasions,  and 
these  now  had  to  decide  whether  they  would  accept 
the  doctrine  of  the  Church  wherein  they  had  con- 
stituted themselves  teachers,  or  resign  their  benefices. 
At  least  eighteen  hundred  adopted  the  latter  alter- 
native. Many  of  them  were  illiterate  tradesmen  and 
artisans.  These  returned  to  the  secular  pursuits  they 
had  quitted.  Several  were  allowed  to  occupy  chap- 
laincies in  almshouses,  gaols,  and  noblemen's  families. 
The  anniversary  of  the  ejectment  of  these  intruders  is, 
however,  commemorated  as  "  Black  Bartholomew's  "  in 
the  Puritan  Calendar,  and  their  fate  is  represented  as 
peculiarly  pitiable,  because  Charles  had  led  them  to 
expect  concessions  by  the  Declarations  from  Breda  and 
Worcester  House.     To  credit  Charles  with  sincerity  of 


'  The  Act  also  demanded  an  abjuration  of  the  anti-Episcopalian  Covenant, 
and  a  renunciation  of  the  "  traitorous  position  "  that  it  is  lawful  to  take  up  arms 
against  the  king. 


CHARLES  II.  413 

intention  is  probably  impossible.  It  must  be  remem-  chap. 
bered,  however,  that  Parliament  would  not  have  per-  ^^}'  . 
mitted  him  to  show  toleration  had  he  wished  it.  Bear- 
ing in  mind  the  cruel  persecution  which  the  legitimate 
incumbents  had  undergone  in  the  day  of  Puritan 
triumph,  we  shall  rather  be  inclined  to  wonder  that 
a  sweeping  ejectment  of  the  usurpers  did  not  take  place 
in  1660.  The  country  appears  to  have  borne  the  retire- 
ment of  the  preachers  with  equanimity,  and  the  new 
incumbents  were  generally  received  with  enthusiastic 
acclamations.  The  popularity  of  Puritanism  had,  in 
fact,  been  sapped  by  the  proceedings  of  the  last  twenty 
years.  The  Church  made  steady  progress  in  the  The 
affections  of  the  people,  and  under  the  rule  of  Juxon's  ^fvaL^ 
successor,  Archbishop  Sheldon,  a  real  impulse  was 
given  to  the  cause  of  Anglo-Catholicism.  Here  and 
there  slovenly  ritual  betrayed  that  the  incumbent  was 
a  conforming  Puritan.  Generally,  however,  decency 
and  order  prevailed.  The  surplice  and  the  clerical 
dress,  if  not  always  worn,  were  no  longer  ostentatiously 
impugned.  The  altars  gradually  regained  their  legiti- 
mate position  in  the  chancels,  and  the  Church's  great 
act  of  worship  resumed  its  proper  place  in  the  Anglican 
cult.  Even  in  the  see  of  Norwich,  hitherto  the  foun- 
tain-head of  Puritanism,  the  Church  system  recovered 
popularity.  In  1676,  according  to  Dr.  Sherlock,  all 
the  nonconformists,  the  Eomanists  included,  were  but 
a  twentieth  part  of  the  population. 

By  the  Caroline  Settlement  the  doctrinal  position  of 
the  Church  was  established,  its  liturgical  aj^paratus 
completed.  Henceforth  we  have  only  to  sketch  the 
history  of  the  Eeformed  Anglo-Catholic  institution  in 
its  political  and  social  relations.  An  important  modifi-  The  ciergr 
cation   in  the  clerical   status  may  first  be  noticed  as  rSS^o?^"^ 


414  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

introduced  in  1664,  when  tlie  clergy  were  persuaded 
by  Sheldon   to   resign  their  ancient   right   of  taxing 
taxing        themselves  in  Convocation.     For  this  change  the  way 

tliemselves  _  ... 

in  Con-         was  prepared  by  the  usurpation  of  the  sectarian  divines, 

vocation, 

who  had  placed  themselves  on  a  footing  with  the 
laity  for  purposes  of  taxation.  Convocation  had,  how- 
ever, voted  supplies  in  the  usual  way  on  the  accession 
of  Charles,  and  Sheldon's  innovation  may,  perhaps, 
be  regarded  as  a  device  for  protecting  the  Church  from 
the  unconscionable  exactions  of  the  new  sovereign. 
The  alteration  was  by  no  means  an  unqualified  bless- 
ing. It  necessarily  lowered  the  dignity  of  Convocation, 
and  it  afforded  a  pretext  for  that  unrighteous  suppression 
of  the  Church's  representative  body  which  was  effected 
under  George  I.  The  first  Parliamentary  bill  for 
supply  in  which  clerical  possessions  were  included 
passed  in  November,  1664.  Two  subsidies  lately 
voted  in  Convocation  were  remitted  as  a  set  off,  and 
the  statute  on  the  subject  disclaims  all  intention  of 
prejudicing  the  ancient  rights  of  the  Church.^  The 
clergy  henceforth  had  the  same  rights  as  other  citizens 
as  concerned  voting  for  Parliament  and  sitting  therein 
as  members.  The  latter  of  these  rights  was  most 
unjustly  taken  away  in  the  year  1802. 

For  the  first  twelve  years  of  this  reign,  the  amity  of 
political      the    Commons   towards   the    Church   continued   unim- 

relations  of.-  T-r»'x  c  •  i.  •  i 

thechurcii  paired,  and  luritan  nonconiormity  was  rigorously 
to°i67J3.^°  suppressed  by  Acts  of  Parliament.  The  king's  policy 
was  to  use  both  the  Anglicans  and  the  Dissenters  as 
his  tools.  During  these  years  he  usually  posed  as  the 
champion  of  aggrieved  nonconformists,  with  the  two- 
fold object  of  establishing  a  claim  to  i>>-sue  dispensa- 
tions,  and    of    obtaining    relief    for    Romanism,    the 

M6  &  17  Car.  II.  c.  1. 


CHARLES  11.  415 

religion  to  which  he  secretly  inclined.  At  the  close  of 
this  period,  Charles's  pronounced  patronage  of  Eoman- 
ism  compelled  the  Commons  to  shift  their  position,  and  And  from 
league  with  the  Dissenters  on  a  "  no  popery "  basis,  less. 
The  court  thereupon  again  sought  the  alliance  of  the 
prelates.  The  Church  suffered  as  before  for  its  con- 
scientious attachment  to  principles  of  absolutism. 
From  Charles  it  experienced  nothing  but  duplicity  and 
ingratitude,  and  for  his  sake  it  impaired  its  recently 
recovered  popularity. 

As  early  as  December,  1662,  the  king  issued  a  De-  Charles 
claration    which   was  a   manifest   bid   for   Dissenting  with  the 
support.     He  promised  therein  to  move  Parliament  to  Dec.  lees. 
cede   indulgence  to  nonconformity,  so  that  he  might 
"  exercise  with  moi-e  universal  satisfaction  that  power 
of  dispensing  which  w^e  conceive  to  be  in  us."      The 
Commons  indignantly  remonstrated,  urging  that  this  And  rouses 
offer  contravened  the  "  Act  of  Uniformity,"  and  was  nation  ^^ 
calculated  to  increase  sectarianism  and  foster  popery,  commons; 
The    king    had   to    give   way.      The    Commons   were 
determined   that  Puritanism  should  not  rise  from  its 
ashes,  and  that  Church  and  State  should  not  again  be 
endangered  for  Stuart  theories  of  absolutism.     Among 
the  clergy  the  Declaration  had  produced  a  panic,  as 
obviously  calculated  to  revive  the  religious  disorders 
of  the    past.      Petitions  were  presented  against  "  the 
strange  prodigious  race  of  men  who  laboured  to  throw 
off  the  yoke   of    government,  both  civil  and   ecclesi- 
astical."    Laws  were  demanded  for  the  suppression  of 
the  Anabaptists,  and  for  the  exaction  of  fines  for  non- 
attendance  at   church.     The  Commons,  nothing   loth, 
responded  to  these  requests  by  passing  some  rigorous 
measures    against    the    sectaries.      The     first     "  Con-  ^he  Acts 
venticle    Act"    forbade   attendance    at    their   nraver- ^"'^  ^®^''®^^" 

1       J^      ingnon- 


4i6 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


CHAP. 
XVI. 

conformity. 
A.I>.  1664. 


A.D.  1665. 


A.D.  1670. 


Tlie  "De- 
claration 
of  Indul- 
gence." 
Marcli, 
1672. 


meetings.  Not  more  than  five  persons,  besides  the 
members  of  the  household,  could  be  present  at  any 
religious  meeting  where  the  Liturgy  was  not  used.  A 
third  breach  of  the  law  on  this  subject  rendered  the 
offender  liable  to  transportation  to  the  American 
plantations.  The  Commons  waxed  more  determined  in 
their  policy  when  it  was  found  that  the  king  was 
tempting  the  Lords  to  sell  toleration  by  waj''  of 
auc-mentino;  the  revenue.  In  1665  came  the  "Five 
Mile  Act,"  prohibiting  nonconformist  ministers  who 
refused  the  oaths  from  coming  within  five  miles  of  the 
parish  in  which  they  had  ministered,  till  they  should 
be  compliant ;  the  penalty  for  infringement  of  the 
Act  to  be  a  fine  of  £40,  and  six  months'  imprisonment. 
In  1670  a  second  "  Conventicle  Act  "  was  passed,  more 
searching  and  extensive  in  its  scope,  but  less  severe  in 
respect  to  penalties.  The  Baptists  and  the  Quakers 
appear  to  have  been  the  chief  sufferers  under  these 
statutes.  Actuated  by  the  motives  already  mentioned, 
the  king  persistently  espoused  the  nonconformist  cause. 
Clarendon,  "  the  best  of  writers,  the  best  of  patriots, 
and  the  best  of  men,"  was  disgraced  and  imprisoned  for 
refusing  to  sacrifice  the  Church.  The  licentious 
courtiers  were  encouraged  to  insult  and  deride  the 
bishops.  At  last,  in  March,  1672,  there  appeared  a 
royal  "  Declaration  of  Indulgence,"  suspending  all 
penalties  against  nonconformity,  and  allowing  the  con- 
tinuance of  Dissenting  conventicles,  and  the  celebration 
of  Eomanist  worship  in  private  houses.  This  mani- 
festo received  scant  respect  in  the  House  of  Commons. 
It  was  voted,  by  a  majority  of  fifty-two,  that  the  "  king's 
prerogative  in  matters  ecclesiastical  does  not  extend  to 
repealing  Acts  of  Parliament,"  and  Charles  was  forced 
to  submit. 


CHARLES  II.  417 

The  Declaration  was  rightly  interpreted  as  meaning      chap. 
that  the  kino-  was  under  the  same  religious  influences     ^V~^ 
as  his  brother  the  Duke  of  York,   and    was   bent   on 
securing    concessions   to   Eomanistn.      This   discovery- 
altered  the  conditions  of  the  contest.     The  nonconfor- 
mist sectary  had  always  been  ready  to  persecute  the 
Eoman  Catholic,  however  clamorous  his  cry  for  toleration 
for  his  own  shibboleths.  The  Commons,  therefore,  turned  The 
from  the  prelates,  and  began    to    conciliate    the   Dis-  cc-operate 
senters,  with  the  hope  of  securing  their  co-operation  in  J^ssenters 
resistino-  the  progress  of  Eomanism.     A  "  Test  Act "  against  the 

o  ID  Romanists. 

directed  against  the  Eomanists  obliged  all  officers,  The  "Test 
civil  and  military,  to  take  the  oaths  of  allegiance  and  a.d.  1673. 
supremacy,  to  receive  the  Holy  Communion  according 
to  the  Anglican  rites,  and  to  make  an  express  declara- 
tion against  transubstantiation.  In  return  for  the 
support  given  by  the  Dissenters  to  the  "  Test  Act,"  the 
Commons  proposed  a  bill  granting  them  toleration. 
This  failed  to  pass  the  Lords.  A  bill  for  the  "  compre- 
hension "  of  Dissenters  was  prepared  by  Sir  Matthew 
Hale  in  1674,  but  was  stopped  by  the  king,  who  was 
now  on  the  side  of  the  Church. 

The  last  eight  years  of  this  reign  further  embittered  Persecu- 
the  animosity  against  the  Roman  Catholics.     In  1678  RomaLsts. 
a  conspiracy,  real  or  imaginary,  was  revealed  by  the  •^•^-  ■'^®'^®- 
infamous  Titus  Gates,  having  for  its  object  the  resto- 
ration    of    popery.      Several     eminent    persons    were 
broTight  to  the  scaffold  as  involved  in  the  plot,  and  all 
adherents  of  Eomanism  were  subjected  to  persecution. 
Eoman  Catholics  were  forbidden  to  go  five  miles  from 
their   houses    without   a   licence.     Such   as   were    not 
householders  were  expelled  from  London.     An  Act  was 
passed  which  excluded  all  Eoman  Catholics  from  Parlia- 
ment (30  Car.  II.  st.  2).     The  Commons  were  prorogued 

2  E 


41 8  ECCLESIA    ANGLICANA. 

CHAP,  whilst  discussing  a  "  Bill  of  Exclusion,"  setting  aside 
.  ^^^'  .  James's  claim  to  the  throne.  This  bill  was  actually 
James  passed  in  1680,  but  was  thrown  out  in  the  Lords,  where 
by^th?  ^  the  bishops,  of  course,  maintained  the  principle  of 
A$°r680  olivine  right.  The  attitude  of  the  spiritual  peers  at 
this  crisis  completed  the  restoration  of  the  ancient 
alliance  of  court  and  Church.  The  Commons,  on  the 
other  hand,  though  unshaken  in  their  loyalty  to  Church 
principles,  were  inclined  to  regard  the  nonconformists 
as  their  natural  allies  in  their  campaign  against 
Romanism. 
Discoveries  The  example  of  Titus  Gates  was  an  easy  one  to 
follow,  and  the  country  was  now  continually  dis- 
turbed by  fresh  discoveries  of  politico-religious  con- 
spiracies. The  year  1683  disclosed  a  Presbyterian 
scheme  to  murder  Charles  and  the  Duke  of  York.  This 
conspiracy  (known  as  the  "  Meal  Tub  Plot ")  was 
probably  invented  by  the  Eomanists  as  a  set-off  to  the 
disclosures  of  Gates.  The  "  Eye  House  Pli)t  "  appears 
to  have  been  a  genuine  conspiracy,  devised  by  Shaftes- 
bury to  effect  these  purposes.  The  revolutionary 
plot  which  brought  Lord  Russell  to  the  scaffold  pro- 
posed to  upset  the  Government  by  less  sanguinary 
measures.  The  general  feeling  of  insecurity  to  some 
extent  lessened  the  antagonism  towards  James,  and  on 
his  brother's  death  he  was  recognized  as  the  lawful 
successor  to  the  throne. 

Such  is  the  political  aspect  of  the  Church  history  of 
this  reign.  The  Church  had  resumed  its  former  atti- 
tude of  antagonism  to  the  Commons,  and  had  somewhat 
impaired  its  popularity.  The  prelates  M^ere  still 
devoted  to  the  chimeras  of  divine  right  and  passive 
obedience — theories  which  were  sadly  dis^Daraged  by  the 
character  of  the  present  sovereign,  and  were  hopelessly 


CHARLES  II.  419 

sTiattered  by  the  tyrannical  conduct  of  liis  successor. 
The  social  aspect  of  England  during  this  period  ap- 
pears, at  first  sight,  fit  to  be  depicted  only  in  the  darkest 
colours.     The  influence  of  a  dissolute  court,   and  the  Prevalence 

ofim- 

reaction  from  the  gloomy  Pharisaism  of  the  mterreg-  morality, 
num,  combined  to  lower  the  standard  of  public  morals 
throughout  the  country.  Profane  swearing  and  blas- 
phemy, gaming  and  duelling,  were  fast  on  the  increase, 
and  the  lives  of  the  clergy  were  not  always  uncontami- 
nated    by   this   widespread    infection.      Nevertheless,  counter- 

«^  ^  -■■        ^  acting' 

powerful  if  unobtrusive  influences  were  operating  to  influences, 
counteract  this  "  overflowing  of  ungodliness."  Each  of 
the  two  religious  schools  had  recently  contributed  its 
quota  to  English  devotional  literature,  and  Hammond's 
"  Practical  Catechism  "  and  Baxter's  "  Saint's  Ever- 
lasting Eest  "  were  both  widely  ciiculated.  Missionary 
zeal  expressed  itself  in  the  establishment  of  the  first 
Society  for  the  Propagation  of  the  Gospel,  and  in  the 
assiduous  exertions  of  Mr.  Boyle,  its  president,  to  pro- 
cure translations  of  the  Bible  of  1611,  for  difi'usion  in 
foreign  parts.  Large  sums  of  money  appear  to  have 
been  subscribed  for  the  restoration  and  embellishment 
of  the  churches  and  cathedrals  which  had  suffered  in 
the  period  of  confusion.  Eeligion,  if  not  widely 
diffused,  seems  to  have  gone  deeper,  and  produced 
more  practical  results  than  in  many  more  favourable 
epochs. 

Intellectual  kept  pace  and  co-operated  with  religious  The  age  of 
activity.  At  the  head  of  the  Church  there  appeared  divines. 
a  galaxy  of  divines  of  extraordinary  ability.  Cosin, 
Sanderson,  Gauden,  and  Walton  have  been  already 
mentioned.  The  Caroline  episcopate  included  also 
Jeremy  Taylor,  the  most  learned  and  eloquent  of 
English  writers ;  and  Pearson,  the  author  of  the  treatise 


liatitudina' 
riaus. 


420  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA, 

on  the  Creed.  In  its  priestliood  were  Barrow  and 
Son  til,  the  one  the  most  erudite,  the  other  certainly  the 
wittiest  of  our  homilists ;  and  Bull,  the  author  of  the 
"Defensio  Fidei  Nicen^e."  By  these  mighty  doctors 
the  Calvinism  which  had  tainted  the  Church  since 
1558  was  exposed  in  its  true  colours,  and  this  gloomy 
parody  on  Augustinian  theology  was  at  last  seldom 
accepted  outside  the  confines  of  Dissenting  sects. 
Rise  of  the  Side  by  side  with  these  representatives  of  orthodoxy, 
there  was  growing  up  a  new  school  of  thinkers,  the 
congeners  of  the  modern  Broad  Church  party.  The 
"  Latitudinarians "  were  opposed  to  the  exaction  of 
strict  conformity,  and  professed  the  most  liberal  views 
as  to  the  possibility  of  salvation.  It  is  the  glory  of 
this  school  that  its  teaching  hastened  the  extinction 
of  that  spirit  of  intolerance  which  characterized  many 
of  the  orthodox  Anglicans,  and  burnt  more  fiercely  in 
the  breasts  of  the  Protestant  sectaries.  Unfortunately 
this  toleration  was  often  prompted  not  so  much  by 
charity  as  by  haziness  of  religious  principle.  To  the 
teaching  of  these  divines  must  be  ascribed  those 
varieties  of  heresy  and  unbelief  which  infected  the 
Church  of  the  eighteenth  century.  The  Latitudi- 
narians thus  exercised  a  weighty  influence,  both  for 
good  and  for  evil,  on  the  fortunes  of  the  Church  and 
the  religious  sentiments  of  the  whole  nation.  Chilling- 
worth,  a  great  logician  and  controversialist,  who  em- 
braced Eomanism  for  a  time  and  wrote  "  The  Religion 
of  Protestants  a  Safe  Way  "  in  1637,  may  be  regarded 
as  the  founder  of  this  school  of  thought.  In  the  present 
reign  it  had  several  adherents  of  the  highest  intellectual 
capacity.  Foremost  among  these  were  Stillingfleet, 
Tillotson,  Patrick,  and  Henry  More. 


JAMES  11.  TO  GEORGE  I.  421 


CHAPTEK  XVII. 
g^amcg  531.  to  Scorge  3E. 

A.D.  1685-1714. 

James  promises  to  support  the  Church — His  liberation  of  the  victims  of  the 
"  Supremacy  Act  " — His  relations  with  Rome — The  coronation — The  new  Parlia- 
ment— James's  retention  of  the  Romanist  officers — The  judges  decide  in  favour  of 
the  dispensing  power — It  is  used  to  restore  Romanism — Resistance  of  the  clergy 
— Dr.  Sharp's  sermon — The  High  Commission  Court  revived — Sancroft  excuses 
himself  from  attendance — Bishop  Compton  suspended  by  the  Commission — The 
"  Declaration  for  Liberty  of  Conscience  " — Elfects  of  its  publication  among  Church, 
men — And  Dissenters — Tyranny  exercised  at  Cambridge — And  at  Oxford — 
Manipulation  of  corporations  and  lords-lieutenants — The  clergy  are  to  read  the 
"  Declaration  of  Indulgence  " — The  petition  of  the  seven  bishops — The  Declaration 
not  read  by  the  clergy — The  bishops  in  the  Tower — Acquittal  of  the  bishops — 
The  Commission  employed  against  the  non-compliant  clergy — The  invitation  to 
William  of  Orange — James  in  consultation  with  the  bishops — They  refuse  a 
declaration  of  abhorrence — William  at  Exeter — Is  ^V"illiam  to  be  regent  or  king  ? 
— The  Settlement — Enforcement  of  the  oath  of  allegiance — Deprivation  of  non- 
jurors— Ken  and  other  eminent  nonjurors — The  Government  accepted  as  de facto, 
not  de  ja?-e— The  Church  under  William  III.— The  "  Toleration  Bill  "—The  "  Bill 
for  Union  " — Thrown  out  by  loyal  Churchmen  in  the  Commons — The  king  forced 
to  summon  Convocation — The  commission  of  revision— Convocation  refuses  its 
sanction — Tillotson's  encroachments  on  the  Church's  liberties — The  Convocation 
controversy — Convocation  again  allowed  to  meet — The  Lower  at  issue  with  the 
Upper  House — Foundation  of  the  S.P.C.K.  and  S.P.G. — The  Church  under  Queen 
Anne — Abolition  of  the  committee  for  preferments — Restitution  of  the  first- 
fruits  and  tenths — Queen  Anne's  Bounty  fund — Convocation — The  sacramental 
test — The  "Act  against  Occasional  Conformity  " — The  "Schism  Bill" — The 
"  Church  in  danger  "  cry— Dr.  Sacheverell — Popularity  of  Anglican  principles — 
Provision  tor  new  churches — Literary  productions  of  the  reign — The  negotiations 
with  the  German  Protestants. 

On   his   accession,    James   assured  tlie   Council  of  his  James 
intention  to  protect  the  Church,  as  the  bulwark  of  the  to  support 
monarchy  and  the  champion  of  loyal  principles.     It  was  *^^  Church. 
a  well-deserved  compliment,  for  it  was  the  Church's  sup- 


42  2  ECCLESIA  ANGLICANA. 

CHAP,  port  of  the  doctrine  of  "  hereditary  right  "  that  had 
— v—l-  caused  the  collapse  of  the  "  Bill  of  Exclusion  "  and  the 
"  Kegency  Bill."  The  manoeuvre  of  affecting  concern 
for  aggrieved  Dissenters  to  secure  concessions  to  the 
Romanists  had  been  adopted  repeatedly  by  Charles  II. 
James  eventually  made  this  his  settled  policy.  Already 
he  had  cemented  a  friendship  with  the  celebrated 
William  Penn,  with  the  view  of  uniting  the  interests 
of  the    Quakers   and  the    Roman    Catholics,  the  two 

His  ubera-  rcligious  parties  which  refused  the  oath  of  supremacy. 

vTctims  ^    The  result  of  this  alliance  was  an  order  for  the  release 

°*supre-      ^^  ^^    wl^c>    had   been   imprisoned    on    this    account. 

^^^^■^5=*"  Some  fifteen  hundred  Quakers  and  a  lar^re  number  of 

April  18.  ^  ° 

Romanists  thus  recovered  their  liberty. 
His  reia-  The  accession  of  the  papist  sovereign  excited  little 

Rome^^*^  enthusiasm  at  Rome,  for  James  maintained  his  brother's 
policy  of  venal  subservience  to  France,  where  the  Pope 
was  embroiled  with  Louis  XIV.  on  the  subject  of  the 
Galilean  liberties.  Innocent  XL  saw,  moreover,  that  the 
doctrine  of  absolutism  was  not  calculated  to  reinstate 
the  Roman  faith  in  the  affections  of  England.  Through- 
out the  struggle  of  the  next  five  years,  Rome  showed 
no  sympathy  for  James's  policy.  "  Every  letter  which 
went  from  the  Vatican  to  Whitehall  recommended 
patience,  moderation,  and  respect  for  the  prejudices  of 
the  English  people."  ^ 
The  coro-         On  the  secoud  Sunday  after  Charles's  death,  Mass  was 

nation.  .  t-it-?! 

April  23.  ostentatiously  celebrated  m  the  king  s  chapel.  At  the 
coronation  Sancroft  was  directed  to  omit  the  Com- 
munion Service  and  the  ceremony  of  presenting  the 
sovereign  with  an  English    translation  of    the  Bible. 

The  new      Bribery  and  corruption  were  used  to  secure  a  Commons 

'  Macaulay,  History  of  England,  vol.  i.  p.  365.  In  1688  Innocent's  hatred  of 
France  induced  him  to  contribute  money  towards  the  expense  of  William's 
expedition  :  see  Dalrymple,  Memoirs,  i.  222. 


1 


JAMES  11.    TO    GEORGE  I.  423 

well  affected  to  the  throne.     James  expressed  himself      chap. 
satisfied  with  the  results.     A  resolution  was,  however,    ^^^L. 
passed  in  this   new  House,  expressing  fervent  attach-  ^^^j^" 
ment  to  the  Anglican  system,  and  demanding  the  exe- 
cution of  the  penal  laws  against  nonconformity.    The 
king's  indignation  induced  the  House  to  withdraw  this 
resolution.     It  did  so  with  a  significant  expression  of 
confidence  in  his  majesty's  recent  promise  to  protect  the 
Chuich. 

Monmouth's  insurrection  received  no  countenance 
from  the  clergy,  and  Bishops  Mew  and  Fell  gave  im- 
portant assistance  to  the  royal  forces.  Good  Bishop 
Ken  was  assiduous  in  relieving  the  sufferings  of  the 
prisoners,  and  it  was  owing  to  the  entreaties  of  the 
canons  of  Winchester  that  Alice  Lisle's  sentence  was 
commuted.  In  the  regiments  hastily  levied  to  resist 
Monmouth,  there  were  several  officers  of  the  proscribed 
faith.  Their  case  gave  the  king  his  first  opportunity 
of  overriding  the  "  Test  Act."  When  Parliament  met,  he  Nov.  9. 
announced  his  intention  of  keeping  up  a  large  armed  retention 
force,  and  retaining  the  Romanist  officers.  This  speech  Romanist 
excited  great  apprehension.  The  officers  might  he  em-  °^'=®^^- 
ployed  to  subvert  the  constitution  in  Church  and  State. 
The  standing  army  recalled  the  hateful  period  of 
Puritan  oppression.  Compton  Bishop  of  London,  the 
tutor  of  the  two  princesses,  spoke  boldly  againist  James's 
policy,  declaring  in  the  name  of  the  whole  episcopate 
that  the  king's  conduct  endangered  the  civil  and 
ecclesiastical  constitution  of  England.  So  great  was 
the  excitement  that  the  king  was  forced  to  prorogue 
Parliament.  Compton  was  deprived  of  the  deanery 
of  the  Chapel  Royal,  and  his  name  was  struck  off  the 
list  of  Privy  Councillors. 

James's  hopes  lay  in  that  romantic  doctrine  of  loyalty 


424  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

which  had  been  promulgated  by  the  Tories  and  High 
Churchmen  of  his  father's  time.     The  dispensing  power 
of  the  sovereign  was  still  accredited  by  many.      The 
king  determined  first  to  set  this  prerogative  on  an  un- 
assailable  footing,    and  then   to  use  it  to  re-establish 
Eomanism.     The  trial  of  Sir  Edward  Hales,  an  officer 
who  had  been  converted  to  Eomanism,  was  got  up  with 
this  end   in   view.     His   servant   played    the   part   of 
informer,  and  claimed  the  penalty  of  £500  awarded  by 
the  statute.     Hales  pleaded  that  royal  letters    patent 
authorized  him  to  retain  his  commission.     The  bench 
of  judges  had    been    previously   manipulated   by   the 
The  judges  king.     Lord    Chief    Justice   Herbert     gave   it   as   the 
favour  of.     Opinion  of  eleven  judges   out  of  twelve  that  the  king 
pen^ne       flight  lawfully  dispense  with  penal  statutes  in  par- 
j°^^^i686  *^^^^^i*  cases  and  for  special  reasons  of  grave  importance. 
This  verdict  was  utilized  as  establishing  the  king's 
It  IS  used     rio;ht  to  io;nore  the  "Test  Act."  Romanists  were  admitted 

to  restore  "  '-' 

Romanism,  to  civil,  military,  and  even  ecclesiastical  offices.  Four 
Roman  Catholic  peers,  and  Petre  the  vice  provincial  of 
the  English  Jesuits,  were  sworn  of  the  Privy  Council. 
John  Massey,  a  Roman  Catholic  and  a  layman,  was 
made  Dean  of  Christ  Church.  The  bishopric  of 
Oxford  was  given  to  Samuel  Parker,  who  was  at  heart 
a  Romanist.  Obadiah  Walker,  a  pervert,  was  allowed 
to  retain  the  mastership  of  University  College,  and  to 
celebrate  the  Roman  rites  in  his  chapel.  Piocessions 
of  Roman  priests  appeared  in  the  streets,  and  the  re- 
ligions fraternities  were  re-established.  Three  vicars 
apostolic  were  received  as  bishops  in  partihus.  A  colony 
of  Benedictines  was  attached  to  S.  James's  Chaj)el ;  the 
Jesuits  established  a  large  public  school  at  the  Savoy  ; 
the  Franciscans  settled  at  Lincoln's  Inn. 

Resistance       But  strong  as  was  their  attachment  to  the  principle 


JAMES  11.    TO   GEORGE  I.  425 

of  absolutism,  the  clergy  would  not  suffer  it  to  be  used  chap. 
as  a  stalking-horse  against  the  Church.  A  few  bishops  ^-..-L. 
mio-ht  be  found  abettino;  James's  unconstitutional  pro-  of  ti^e 

&  o  -i-  clergy. 

ceedings,  having  received  their  promotion  for  that 
purpose.^  But  the  parish  clergy  almost  unanimously 
followed  the  lead  of  Ken,  Frampton,  and  Sherlock. 
The  London  pulpits  rang  with  denunciations  of 
Eomanism,  and  the  cry  was  taken  up  in  every  part  of 
England.  Pamphlets  against  Popery  were  issued  by 
thousands  at  the  universities,  where  the  press  was  free 
of  royal  censorship.  The  king  used  his  power  as 
supreme  ordinary  to  prohibit  preaching  on  controverted 
points  of  doctrine.  Sancroft  consented  to  issue  this 
royal  injunction,  but  it  produced  little  effect.  Dr.  Br.  sharp's 
Sharp,  Dean  of  Norwich  and  Eector  of  S.  Giles-in-the- 
Fields,  delivered  a  discourse  against  Romanism  which 
attracted  the  king's  attention.  Compton,  his  diocesan,  junei4, 
received  an  order  from  Sunderland  to  suspend  him.  He  ■'■^®^" 
courageously  declined  to  do  so.  He  privately  requested 
Sharp  not  to  appear  in  the  pulpit  for  the  present,  and 
reported  to  the  king  that  the  preacher  was  prepared  to 
give  him  "  all  reasonable  satisfaction,"  James's  wrath 
was  thus  diverted  from  the  priest  to  the  bishop,  who 
was  already  in  ill  odour  for  his  speech  in  the  House  of 
Lords.  This  episode  was  productive  of  important  conse- 
quences. It  will  be  remembered  that  the  High  Commis- 
sion Court  of  Elizabeth  had  made  itself  specially  odious 
to  the  Puritans,  and  had  been  abolijshed  in  July,  IC-il. 
The  accession  of  Charles  II.  had  reinstated  such  courts 
spiritual  as  the  Court  of  Arches,  the  Consistory  courts, 

'  Parker  of  Oxford  and  Cartwright  of  Chester  were  pre-eminent  as  episcopal  para- 
sites. Crewe  of  Durham  and  Sprat  of  Rochester  were  men  of  similar  stamp. 
The  latter  seems  to  have  hoped  to  get  the  archbishopric  of  York.  This  piece  of 
preferment  was  kept  vacant  for  more  than  three  years.  It  is  said  that  James 
waited  for  a  good  opportunity  to  give  it  to  Petre. 


426 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


Sancroft 

excuses 

liimself 

fi'om 

attendance. 


Sept.  3, 
1686. 


Bishop 
Compton 
suspended 
by  the 
Commis- 
sion. 


and  the  archidiaconal  courts,  but  had  declared  this 
notorious  engine  of  royal  oppression  incapable  of  exist- 
ence (13  Car.  II.).  James,  in  defiance  of  this  Act,  now 
announced  that  he  had  entrusted  the  government  of  the 
Church  to  seven  commissioners,  who  were  directed  to 
use  the  seal  of  the  old  court.  They  were  furnished 
with  the  largest  powers  for  purposes  of  visitation. 
Their  jurisdiction  was  to  extend  not  only  to  the  dioceses 
and  universities,  but  to  every  college  and  school  in  the 
kingdom.  At  their  head  was  the  detestable  Jeffreys, 
the  Lord  Chancellor,  whose  presence  and  assent  was 
declared  to  be  necessary  in  all  proceedings.  Three 
episcopal  names  were  included  in  the  Commission — 
Sancroft,  the  primate  ;  Sprat,  Bishop  of  Rochester ;  and 
Crewe,  Bishop  of  Durham.  Sprat  and  Crewe  were 
notorious  as  parasites  who  would  do  all  that  royalty 
required.  Sancroft,  on  the  other  hand,  though  a 
devoted  loyalist,  was  a  more  devoted  Churchman.  He 
had  thought  it  right  to  execute  the  king's  order  in  the 
matter  of  the  "  Injunctions."  But  even  his  overstrained 
loyalty  could  not  accept  a  tribunal  illegal  by  origin  and 
manifestly  designed  to  compass  the  ruin  of  the  Church. 
It  is  disappointing  to  find  that  he  did  not  openly 
denounce  the  Commission.  He  merely  begged  to  be 
excused  attendance  on  the  plea  of  ill  health  and  nume- 
rous engagements.  The  hollo wness  of  the  pretext  was 
sufficiently  discernible.  James  relieved  the  primate  from 
attendance  at  the  Privy  Council,  and  afterwards  made 
Cartvvright  a  Commissioner.  Compton  was  cited  before 
the  six  commissioners.  It  was  found  difficult  to  prove, 
even  in  a  court  which  had  Jeffreys  for  president, 
that  the  bishop  had  in  any  way  transgressed.  Three 
voted  for  an  acquittal,  and  it  was  only  by  menacing  the 
lord  treasurer  with  deprivation  that  the  king  at  last 


JAMES  11.    TO   GEORGE  I.  427 

secured  a  majority.  The  recalcitrant  bishop  was  sus- 
pended, and  Sprat  and  Crewe  were  empowered  to 
administer  his  diocese. 

Baulked  in  his  hopes  of  using  the  loyalist  clergy  as 
his  tools,  the  king  made  up  his  mind  to  eifect  a  great 
coalition  of  Eomanists  and  Dissenters.  In  January, 
1687,  concessions  were  made  to  the  Presbyterians  of 
Scotland.  In  March  the  Council  were  apprised  that  a 
full  indulgence  was  to  be  given  to  all  kinds  of  religious 
opinions.  Hitherto  the  most  remorseless  of  persecutors, 
the  king  now  professed  to  believe  that  all  statutes  to 
enforce  conformity  were  opposed  to  the  spirit  of 
Christianity.  In  April  these  new  opinions  were  pro-  ^he 
claimed  in  the  celebrated  "  Declaration  for  Liberty  of  ^'.^^J^^^'^' 

Conscience."     The  kins;  herein  expressed  his  wish  that  1-it.erty 

.  "...  .  of  Con- 

all  his  subjects  were  Eomanists.    This  being  impossible,  science." 

the  attitude  of  all  religionists  was  to  be  one  of  mutual  les?. 
toleration.  The  Anglican  clergy  were  merely  to  be 
maintained  in  the  enjoyment  of  their  possessions  and 
free  exercise  of  their  religion.  All  assemblies  for  wor- 
ship were  to  be  tolerated,  all  penal  laws  bearing  on 
religion  suspended,  all  tests — not  excepting  the  oaths  of 
supremacy  and  allegiance — dispensed  with.  Such  per- 
sons as  had  incurred  penalties  in  the  matter  of  religion 
were  pardoned.  This  Declaration  was  issued  by  virtue 
of  the  dispensing  power.  The  king  affected  to  make 
no  doubt  of  the  concurrence  of  the  two  Houses  of 
Parliament,  "  when  we  shall  think  it  convenient  for 
them  to  meet." 

It  is  singular  to  find  the  nineteenth-century  theory 
of  religious  toleration  forestalled  b}^  a  ruler  so  cruel 
and  unprincipled  as  James  II.  But  that  the  principle 
of  the  Declaration  has  survived  neither  proves  that  it 
was  a  proper  measure  for  the  year  1687,  nor  palliates 


428 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


Effects  of 
the  publi- 
cation 
among' 
Church- 
men. 

And  Dis- 
senters. 


Tyranny 
exercised 
at  Cam- 
bridge. 
Feb.  1687. 


the  illegality  of  tlie  king's  procedure.  The  Declaration 
was  odious,  both  as  assuming  a  royal  power  to  cancel 
the  legislation  of  Parliament,  and  as  a  transparent 
device  to  fill  the  offices  of  state  with  Romanists,  and 
so  secure  the  restoration  of  Popery.  Charles  had  been 
forced  to  relinquish  a  scheme  of  toleration  of  far  nar- 
rower scope.  It  is  not  surprising  that  the  Declaration 
roused  the  country  to  a  paroxysm  of  indignation.  The 
court  party  vainly  tried  to  get  up  addresses  of  thanks 
from  the  clergy.  Five  obsequious  bishops  expressed 
their  gratitude  for  his  majesty's  promise  to  protect  the 
Church.  But  the  parish  priests,  almost  to  a  man, 
refused  to  sign  such  manifestoes.  The  Dissenters,  how- 
ever, with  a  few  notable  exceptions,  gladly  abetted  the 
king's  policy.  Some  sixty  addres^ses  came  from  the 
nonconforming  congregations,  filled  with  the  most 
ardent  expressions  of  loyalty.  "  Anabaptists,  Presby- 
terians, and  Quakers  promiscuously  crowded  the  royal 
presence.  .  .  James  was  compared  to  Cyrus,  to  Moses, 
to  several  other  deliverers  of  the  people  of  God  in  the 
ancient  world ;  his  piety  was  praised,  his  moderation 
extolled,  his  magnanimity  raised  to  the  skies."  ^  With 
more  consistency  Baxter,  Howe,  Kiffin,  Bunyan,  and  a 
few  other  eminent  Dissenters,  denounced  the  Declaration 
as  insidious  and  illegal. 

Meantime  the  commissioners  were  facilitating  the 
aggressions  of  royalty  at  the  universities.  To  Cam- 
bridsfe  James  had  sent  a  Benedictine  monk  named  Allan 
Francis,  to  be  admitted  a  Master  of  Arts.  The  Acts 
of  Parliament  required  that  none  should  proceed  to  this 
degree  without  taking  the  oath  of  supremacy  and  a 
similar  pledge  termed  the  oath  of  obedience.  Francis's 
religion  forbade  him  to  accept  this  requisition.     The 

'  Macpherson,  1.  436,  437  :  see  also  Kettlewell's  Life,  62,  63. 


JAMES  11.    TO   GEORGE  I.  429 

academical  body  respectfully  submitted  to  the  king  that  chap. 
it  would  be  illegal  to  confer  the  degree.  For  this  Dr.  /^^"'  . 
Pechell,  the  vice-chancellor,  was  summoned,  with  eight 
repiesentatives  of  the  senate,  before  the  High  Commis- 
sion. Jeffreys  conducted  the  trial  with  his  wonted  inso- 
lence and  injustice.  Dr.  Pechell  was  deprived  of  the 
vice-chancellorship  and  suspended  froni  the  emoluments 
of  his  mastership.  The  eight  representatives,  one  of 
whom  was  Isaac  Newton,  Professor  of  Mathematics, 
were  di8mis>ed  with  the  admonition,  "  Go  your  way 
and  sin  no  more,"  etc.  Magdalen  College,  Oxford,  was  And  at. 
dealt  with  in  similar  fashion.  On  the  death  of  their  °^°^^ 
presiident,  the  king  sent  a  letter  to  the  collegiate  body 
recommending  the  election  of  Anthony  Farmer,  a 
Cambridge  man  of  disreputable  character,  formerly 
a  Dissenter,  and  now  of  the  Eoman  Communion.  The 
law  forbade  the  appointment  of  a  Eoman  Catholic. 
The  college  statutes  required  the  master  to  be  a  member 
of  Magdalen  or  New  College,  and  a  person  of  good 
moral  character.  On  these  grounds  the  fellows  begged 
the  king  to  select  some  other  nominee.  No  notice  was 
taken  of  the  request.  The  fellows  met  and  elected  Dr. 
Hough.  They  were  summoned  to  Whitehall,  where 
Dr.  Fairfax  was  deprived  of  his  fellowship  for  express-  June,  i687. 
ing  a  doubt  as  to  the  validity  of  the  Commission.  For 
Farmer  the  king  now  substituted  a  more  respectable 
nominee  in  the  person  of  Bishop  Parker.  But  Parker 
was  also  ineligible  as  not  belonging  to  New  or  Magda- 
len. The  fellows  declined  to  rescind  their  nomination 
of  Hough.  James  himself  visited  the  college,  and 
employed  Penn  to  urge  the  duty  of  submission.  But 
neither  king  nor  courtier  could  persuade  the  fellows  to 
violate  their  statutes.  A  special  commission  was 
accordingly  appointed  to  effect  a  visitation  at  Magda- 


430 


ECCLESIA    ANGLICANA. 


CHAP. 
XVII. 

Nov.  16, 
1687. 


Manipula- 
tion of 
corpora- 
tions and 
lords-lieu- 
tenants. 
Dec.  12, 
1687. 


The  clergT 
are  to  read 
the  "De- 
claration 
of  Indul- 
gence." 
May  4, 
1688. 


len.  All  the  fellows  but  two  were  expelled,  and  their 
fate  was  shared  by  a  number  of  the  demies.  Parker  died 
soon  afterwards,  and  the  college  was  forthwith  turned 
into  a  Eoman  seminary,  under  Bonaventure  GifPard, 
Bishop  of  Madura. 

In  other  quarters  there  was  similar  aggression.  A 
committee  of  seven  Privy  Councillors  was  appointed  to 
"regulate  "  those  municipal  corpoiations  which  returned 
members.  A  proclamation  announced  the  king's  inten- 
tion to  retain  only  such  magistrates  and  lords-lieutenants 
as  should  support  his  policy.  The  latter  received  orders 
to  supply  the  king  with  a  list  of  such  Romanists  and 
Dissenters  as  appeared  qualified  for  the  bench  and  for 
militia  commands.  Half  the  lords-lieutenants  refused 
compliance,  and  were  at  once  dismissed  from  office. 

The  crisis  was  precipitated  by  the  memorable  events 
of  May  and  June,  1688.  On  May  4  the  notorious 
"Declaration of  Indulgence "  reappeared,  prefaced  by  an 
order  that  the  Church  should  give  it  publication.  Every 
incumbent  was  to  read  it  at  the  time  of  divine  service 
on  Sunday.  In  London  and  the  suburbs  it  was  to  be 
read  on  May  20  and  27;  in  the  provinces  on  June  3  and 
10.  The  bishops  were  to  distribute  it,  and  see  that 
their  clergy  complied  with  the  requisition.  The  object 
of  this  proceeding  was  to  crush  and  humiliate  the  chief 
antagonists  of  Eomanism.  The  clergy  who  refused  to 
read  might  be  legally  proceeded  against  by  their 
diocesans.  Those  who  read  would  appear  to  recognize 
its  validit}^  and  approve  of  the  king's  designs.  Every- 
thing depended  on  the  attitude  of  the  bishops,  and 
seldom  has  the  Church  of  England  received  such  good 
service  at  the  hands  of  her  first  order.  Not  even  the 
loyalty  of  Sancroft  could  find  excuse  for  compliance. 
Despite  his  theories  of  passive  obedience,  the  primate 


JAMES  11.    TO   GEORGE  I.  431 

stood  forward  unliesitatingly   as  the  champion  of  the      chap. 
outraged  Church.     Meetings  of  his  suffragans  and  the     ,  ^^]^' _ . 
leading  London  clergy  were  at  once  convened  at  Lam- 
beth.    It  was  agreed  that  it  was  not  expedient  that  the 
clergy  should   read  the  Declaration.     A   petition  was  May  is. 
drawn  up,  stating  that  the  "Declaration  of  Indulgence  " 
was  "  founded  on  such  a  dispensing  power  as  hath  been 
often    declared   illegal   in  Parliament,"  and    that    the 
bishops  could  not,  "  in  prudence,  honour,  or  conscience 
so  far  make  themselves  parties  to  it,  as  the  distribution 
of  it  all  over  the  nation  and  the  solemn  publication  of 
it  over  and  again  even  in  God's  house  must  amount  to." 
Bancroft  wrote  the  petition  in  his  own  hand.     After  his  The 
signature  appear  the  autographs  of  W.  Asaph.  (Lloyd),  the^seven^ 
Fran.  Ely  (Turner),  lo.  Cicester  (Lake),  Tho.  Bath  and  ^^isnops. 
Wells  (Ken),  Tho.  Petriburgens  (White),  Jon.  Bristol 
(Trelawney).     Six^  other  bishops,  who  had  not  been 
present,  appended  their  "  approbo  "  in  the  course  of  the 
following  week.    "But  it  was  necessary  to  act  on  the 
spur  of  the  moment.     The  petitioners  ^  made  their  way 
that  night    to  Whitehall,   and   put    the  document    in 
James's  hands.     The  king  was  no  less  astonished  than 
irritated.     Accustomed  to  regard  the  Church    as    the 
vindicator  of  absolutism,  he  characterized  the  petition 
as  "strange  words,"  such  as  he  did  not  "expect  from  the 
Church  of  England."     But  the  bishops  were  unmoved. 
Sunday,  May  20,  came,  the  day  when  the  London  clergy 
were  to  read  the  Declaration.    Four  incumbents  only  in 
the  City  complied.     Bishop  Sprat,  Dean  of  Westminster,  The 
read  it,  but  the  abbey  was  emptied  ere  he  had  finished.  tionnoT 
The  country  clergy  followed  the  good  example  of  their  ^^eadbytiie 

'   Those  of  London,  Norwich,  Gloucester,  Salisbury,  Winchester,  and  Exeter. 

"^  Bancroft  did  not  accompany  them.  He  had  not  had  access  to  the  royal  presence 
since  his  declining  to  serve  on  the  High  Commission.  Ken  and  Trelawney  appear 
to  have  been  the  chief  spokesmen. 


432 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA, 


The 

bisliops 
in  the 
ToAver. 


June  29. 


Acquittal 
of  the 
bishops. 


ThelCom- 
mission 
employed 
ag-ainst  the 
non-com- 
pliant 
clergy. 


London  brethren  when  their  day  of  trial  came.  Not 
more  than  two  hundred  incumbents  in  all  complied. 

James,  however,  was  not  convinced  of  the  futility 
of  his  policy.  He  resolved  to  revenge  himself  on  the 
bishops.  Acting  on  the  advice  of  Jeffreys,  he  made 
their  petition  the  ground  for  an  action  for  libel.  The 
bishops  pleaded  their  privilege  as  peers,  and  refused  to 
enter  into  recognizances.  They  were  thereupon  com- 
mitted to  the  Tower.  The  public  excitement  at  this 
juncture  was  intense.  The  river  banks  were  thronged 
by  a  sympathetic  crowd,  and  the  barge  which  conveyed 
the  bishops  was  hailed  with  vociferous  cheers  and 
prayers  for  their  lordships'  welfare.^  Their  prison  was 
attended  like  the  presence-chamber  of  royalty,  and  the 
trial  at  Westminster  is  said  to  have  been  witnessed  by 
half  the  nobility  of  England.  The  absurdity  of  calling 
the  bishops'  petition  a  malicious  libel  must  have  been 
patent  to  all  unprejudiced  minds.  Nevertheless,  two  of 
the  four  judges  had  the  audacity  to  decide  against  the 
accused,  and  three  of  the  jury  stood  out  for  a  conviction 
so  obstinately  that  the  verdict  of  "Not  guilty"  was  not 
brought  into  court  till  ten  o'clock  the  next  mornino-. 

Ere  the  close  of  this  memorable  day,  a  formal  invita- 
tion was  despatched  to  William  of  Orange.  Among  the 
seven  names  attached  to  it  was  that  of  Bishop  Oompton. 
The  universal  rejoicing  which  followed  the  acquittal  of 
the  bishops  might  have  warned  James  of  his  danger. 
He  was  still  bent,  however,  on  punixhing  the  contu- 
macious clergy.  The  Court  of  High  Commission 
received  orders  to  collect  the  names  of  all  who  had 
neglected  to  read  the  Declaration.  The  chancellors, 
archdeacons,  etc.,  were  charged  by  the  court  to  give 
information.     But   scarcely  one  of  these  ofiScers   sent 

'  Burnet's  Own  Times,  p.  469. 


JAMES  II.    TO   GEORGE  L  433 

in   a   return.      Bishop   Sprat   foresaw   the    impending      chap. 
catastrophe,  and  resigned  his  place  on  the  Commission.      .  ^^^^'  . 

In  September  the  king's  eyes  were  rudely  opened  by  The  invita- 
information  of  the  overtures  to  William.     The  emer- ^^fam  of 
gency  drove  him  to  seek  assistance  where  he  had  least  ^^^^^®' 
right  to  expect  it — in  the  Anglican  episcopate.    Despite 
the  wrongs  inflicted  on  the  Church,  the  bishops,  with 
few  exceptions,  still  maintained  the  principle  of  divine 
right.     They  were  prepared  to  accept  William's  co-ope- 
ration  in   restoring  the  national  liberties  should  the 
king  continue  his  hateful  policy.     But  to  the  last  they 
scouted  the  idea  of  dethroning  the  unworthy  sovereign. 
Probably  Compton  himself  had  as  yet  no  thought  of 
raising  William  above  the    rank  of  regent.     By  the  James  in 
advice  of  the  bishops,  James  dissolved  the  High  Com-  tiSfwim 
mission  Court,  restored  the  ejected  fellows  of  Magda-  bishops, 
lene,  and  reinstated  the  disfranchised  corporations.    He 
even  issued  a  proclamation  promising   to  protect  the 
English  Church,  and  maintain  the  Act  of  Uniformity. 
But  the  time  for  conciliatory  policy  was  past.    William's 
manifesto  was  put  into  the  king's  hands.     It  asserted 
that  he  came  at  the  request  of  the  lords  spiritual  and 
temporal.      Sancroft    and    other    bishops    indignantly 
vindicated  the  loyalty  of  the  bench  ;  Compton  contrived 
to  satisfy  the  king  with  an  evasive  answer.     James  They 
required  a  counter    manifesto    asserting   the   bishops'  deSlration 
"abhorrence"  of  William's  design,  but  the  demand  was  °^^''^°^- 
not  complied  with.     Every  hour  enhanced  the  gravity 
of  the  situation,  and  the  only  effect  of  these  consulta- 
tions was  to  prejudice  the  populace  against  the  bishops. 
They  wisely  declined  further  responsibility,  and  refused 
to  give  counsel  without  the  co-operation  of  the  temporal 
peers.^      On  November  5   William  landed   at  Torbay. 

•  Clarendon  Correspondence,  ii.  501. 

2   F 


434  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

CHAP.     He  marclied  unopposed  to  Exeter,  and  held  a  tlianks- 

.  ^^}^'      giving  service  in  the  cathedral.     Bishop  Lamplugh  and 

■William  at  the  Cathedral  dio;nitaries  discreetly  absented  themselves ; 

Exeter.  °  "^  . 

but  Burnet  was  equal  to  the  occasion,  and  himself  read 
Dec.:ii.        the  prince's  declaration.     James's  flight  paved  the  way 
for  a  convention  of  the  lords  spiritual  and  temporal. 
The   mediation   of    the   Prince    of    Orange   was   here 
unanimously  accepted.     An  address  was  drawn  up  re- 
questing him  to  take  steps  for  calling  a  free  Parliament, 
wherein  measures  should  be  taken  for  the  defence  of 
law,  liberty,  property,  "  and  the  Church  of  England  in 
particular,  with  a  due  liberty  to  Protestant  Dissenters."  ^ 
Is  William       Sancroft  and  the  ultra-loyalists  urged   that  James 
rege^nt  or     ouglit  to  be  treated  as  intellectually  incapable,  and  the 
kme?  Prince  of  Orange  nominated  as  his  custos  regni.     But 

public  feeling  ran  in  favour  of  deposition.     The  Con- 
jan.  22.       vcntiou   Parliament   assembled   to   decide    this    issue. 

1689. 

Sancroft  absented  himself.  The  regency  had  the  sup- 
port of  twelve  bishops,  and  narrowly  escaped  passing  in 
the  House  of  Lords.  Two  bishops  only,  Trelawney  and 
Compton,  voted  in  the  majority  which  declared  the 
throne  vacant.  The  future  confines  of  kingly  prerogative 
were  now  determined  by  the  "  Declaration  of  Eights," 
an  instrument  which  expounded  the  principles  of  the 
constitution  in  terms  fatal  to  the  absolutist  doctrine, 
The  The  sovereignty  was  definitely  settled  on  William  and 

Settlement.  Marv,  and  all  who  held  benefices  and  academical  offices 

Feb.  1689.  «^  ' 

were  required  to  take  a  new  oath  of  allegiance. 

It  is  not  surprising  that  this  precipitate  settlement 

was  a  stumbling-block  to  many  consciences,  and  that 

several  clergymen  who  had  no  love  for  James  doubted 

whether  the  transfer  of  allegiance  was  justifiable.    The 

Enforce-      Convention  Parliament,  however,  insisted  on  the  oath. 

ment  of 

^  Kennet,  iii.  500  ;  Echard's  Revolution,  214. 


JAMES  II.    TO  GEORGE  I,  435 

It  was  to  be  taken  by  August  1,  under  penalty  of  a  six       chap. 
months'  suspension,  to  be  followed,  if  the  oath  were      ^^I^L. 
still  refused,  by  a  summary  deprivation.     In  March,  the  oath  of 
1689,  two  bishops  had  taken  the  oath  in  Parliament; 
Sancroft  and  eight  others  ^  had  refused  it.     Thomas, 
Lake,  and  Cartwright  died  before   the  term  of  grace 
expired.     Tlie  remaining  six  were  of  the  same  mind  on 
the  fatal  February  1,  and  suffered  deprivation.     Four 

.  .  Depriva- 

of  the  immortal  seven,  who  had  so  nobly  maintained  tion  of 
the  Church's  liberties  in  the  summer  of  1688,  were  thus  Feb  1690. 
relegated   to    poverty   and    disgrace.      Four   hundred 
incumbents  shared  their  fate.     Many  of  them  were  men 
of  great  ability.     Of  their  earnestness  the  sacrifice  of 
their  emoluments  for  conscience  sake  is  an  unassailable 
proof.     It  may  be  fairly  said  that  the  Church  was  thus 
deprived  of  the  very  pick  of  her  clergy.     They  became 
the  backbone  of  a  "  Jacobite  "  faction,  and  the  founders 
of  a  politico-religious  schism,  which  lasted  for  a  hundred 
years.     The   course    adopted  with  the   nonjurors   was 
mainly  attributable  ^  to  the  influence  of  the  Dissenters. 
They   had   themselves   leagued  with   the  Eomanizing 
James,  and  left  the  bishops  and  clergy  to  defend  the 
cause  of  the  Reformation.     They  now,  however,  assumed 
to  themselves  the  merit  of  the  Revolution,  and  auda- 
ciously   attributed   the   conscientious   scruples  of    the 
defenders  of  the  faith  to   "  Popish "  influence.     They 
were  activel}'^  abetted  by  Burnet.     The  greatest  loss  to 
the  Church  was  Ken,  Bishop  of  Bath  and  Wells,  the  Ken  and 
most  able,  devout,  and  popular  23relate  of  bis  generation,  emin^ent 
He  was  given  an  extra  year  of  grace,  but  continued  ^°"-'^°^^- 
unable  to  reconcile  his  conscience  to  the  new  view  of 
monarch}^,  and  was  accordingly  ejected  in  1691.     Beve- 

'  Ken,  Turner,  Frampton,  Lloyd,  White,  Thomas,  Lake,  and  Cartwright. 
*  Evelyn,  ill.  281. 


XYII. 


436  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

CHAP,  ridge  refused  to  accept  a  see  thus  improperly  vacated. 
Kidder  reluctantly  consented  to  take  it.  Ken  contented 
himself  with  issuing  a  protest  against  the  intrusion  of 
his  successor.  To  the  nonjuring  schism,  fostered  by 
Turner,  Lloyd,  and  White,^  he  gave  no  countenance. 
Archbishop  Sancroft  at  first  accepted  his  fate  with  less 
equanimity.  He  ceded  a  commission  to  three  suffragans 
to  consecrate  Burnet.  He  refused,  however,  to  quit 
Lambeth  Palace  till  removed  by  legal  process.  He 
then  retired  to  his  native  place  in  Suffolk,  and  there 
lived  contentedly  on  fifty  pounds  a  year,  having  dele- 
gated his  archiepiscopal  powers  to  Lloyd,  a  more  active 
nonjuror.  He  died  in  1693.  In  the  second  order  of 
clergy  the  four  most  eminent  victims  were  Jeremy 
Collier,  the  Church  historian ;  Leslie,  the  great  contro- 
versialist; George  Hickes,  Dean  of  Worcester,  afterwards 
consecrated  by  the  nonjuring  bishops  to  the  see  of 
Thetford;  and  John  Kettlewell,  a  scholar  and  divine  of 
some  repute.  Dr.  Sherlock,  the  master  of  the  Temple, 
who  had  advocated  the  doctrine  of  passive  obedience 
in  his  "  Case  of  Resistance,"  deserted  the  nonjurors 
after  a  short  suspension.  His  apology  for  accepting  the 
de  facto  Government  was  published  under  the  title 
"  Case  of  Allegiance  due  to  a  Sovereign  Power."  The 
lay  nonjurors  numbered  in  their  ranks  Henry  Dodwell, 
the   Camden    Professor    at   Oxford;    and   the   devout 

'  These  three  bishops  consecrated  Hickes  and  Wagstaffe  as  bishops  of  Thetford 
and  Ipswich  in  a.d.  1694.  The  numbers  of  the  nonjurors  were  kept  up  by  the 
senseless  policy  which  forced  on  the  clergy  the  "  abjuration  oath,"  declaring 
William  king  de  j'wre,  a.d.  1701.  In  a.d.  1713  Hickes  and  certain  Scotch  bishops 
consecrated  Jeremy  Collier  and  two  others.  A  schism  broke  out  among  the  non- 
jurors in  A.D.  1718,  owing  to  Collier's  attempt  to  restore  the  First  Prayer-book  of 
Edward  VI.  Collier's  party  were  called  "  Usagers,"  a  word  akin  to  the  modern 
term  "  Ritualists."  Reunion  was  effected  in  a.d.  1733,  but  fresh  schisms  occurring 
the  nonjurors  dwindled  in  numbers,  and  were  extinct  before  the  end  of  the  cen- 
tury. William  Law  appears  to  have  been  the  last  eminent  person  belonging  to  the 
nonjurors. 


JAMES  11.    TO   GEORGE  L  437 

Robert  Nelson,  the  author  of  the  "  Fasts  and  Festivals." 
In   justice   to   the  Government  it   must  be   remarked 
that  care  was  taken  to  make  the  oath  palatable  to  these  The 
weak  consciences.     Nothing  was  said  about  the  title  of  jnent  ac- 
the  new  sovereigns.     The  form  was  simply,  "  I,  A.  B.,  ?®^e  fac^to," 
do  sincerely  promise  and  swear  to  bear  true  alleo^iance  '^°*  ''^® 

''  ^  .  ^  jtire." 

to  their  majesties  King  William  and  Queen  Mary."  ^ 
The  clergy  who  took  the  oath  in  1689  could  justify  the 
proceeding  on  the  ground  taken  by  Nicolson,  afterwards 
BishojD  of  Carlisle  :  "  Whenever  a  sovereign  de  facto  is 
universally  submitted  to  and  recognized  by  all  the  three 
estates,  I  must  believe  that  person  to  be  lawful  and 
rightful  monarch  of  this  kingdom,  who  alone  has  a  just 
title  to  my  allegiance."  '^ 

The  two  succeedine:  reigns  are  less  interestins:  to  The  church 

^  ,  .      .  under 

the  student,  and  may  be  quickly  passed  over.  William  •wmiam 
III.  was  a  Presbyterian,  and  had  the  prejudices  of  a 
Puritan  in  matters  of  Church  ritual.  His  knowledge 
of  the  Church  of  England  was  derived  from  Gilbert 
Burnet,  an  intriguing  politician  of  Latitudinarian  views, 
who  had  retired  to  the  Continent  on  the  accession  of 
James,  and  become  chaplain  at  the  Dutch  court.  He 
was  now  raised  to  the  see  of  Salisbury.  The  new  king's 
declaration  had  promised  to  "  endeavour  a  good  agree- 
ment between  the  Church  of  England  and  all  Protestant 
Dissenters,"  and  he  answered  the  addresses  of  Dis- 
senting delegates  by  undertaking  to  attempt  a  union 
of  his  Protestant  subjects  "  on  those  terms  wherein  all 
the  reformed  Churches  agree."  This  object  he  tried 
to  secure  by  measures  necessarily  displeasing  to  faithful 
Churchmen.  So  far  indeed  as  toleration  was  concerned, 
men's  minds  were  gradually  approaching  that  view  of 

'  The  old  oath  of  allegiance  bound  the  subject  to  the  sovereign  as  "  true  and  law- 
ful "  king  or  queen. 
-  Nicolson,  Epistolary  Correspondence,  ii.  337. 


438 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


CHAP. 
XVII. 


The 

"Tolera- 
tion Bill.' 
March, 
1689. 


religious  differences  whicli  is  now  generally  accepted. 
Throne  and  Commons  had  each  been  driven  into 
alliance,  now  with  the  Nonconformists,  now  with  the 
Eomanists.  The  Church  itself  had  received  occasional 
assistance  from  the  anti-Papal  animus  of  the  Puritans. 
There  was  a  general  feeling  that  religious  difference 
was  only  intolerable  when  it  tended  to  foster  the  cause 
of  disloyalty  or  of  tyranny.  A  "  Toleration  Bill," 
therefore,  passed  both  Houses  easily,  and  was  con- 
sidered satisfactory  by  the  staunchest  Churchmen. 
This  bill  relieved  Dissenting  laymen  from  the  pressure 
of  those  Acts  which  had  made  absence  from  divine 
service  a  crime.  It  provided  that  such  Acts  should 
not  be  enforced  where  the  nonconformist  would  testify 
his  loyalty  by  accepting  the  oaths  of  supremacy  and 
allegiance,  and  his  Protestantism  by  signing  the  de- 
claration against  transubstantiation.  The  arrange- 
ment for  extending  toleration  to  the  Dissenting 
ministers  is,  to  modern  thinking,  an  anomaly.  No 
minister  was  to  be  prohibited  from  exercising  his 
functions,  provided  he  signed  the  greater  part  of  the 
Thirty-nine  Articles.  The  portions  he  was  allowed  to 
demur  to  were  those  which  asserted  the  power  of  the 
Church  to  regulate  ceremonies,  the  soundness  of  the 
Book  of  Homilies  and  the  Ordination  Service,  and 
the  efficacy  of  Infant  Baptism.  For  the  Quakers  there 
was  a  special  proviso  of  indulgence.  These  sectaries 
were  to  be  undisturbed,  provided  they  signed  a  de- 
claration against  transubstantiation,  promised  fidelity 
to  the  Government,  and  professed  a  faith  in  certain 
prominent  doctrines  of  Christianity — the  Divinity  of 
the  Son  and  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  the  inspiration  of 
Scripture.  Such  were  the  conditions  on  which  the 
sects  secured  toleration.     They  were  usually  accepted 


JAMES  II.    TO   GEORGE  I  439 

witli  cheerfulness,  and  the  concession  appears  to  have 
given  no  offence  to  Churclinien. 

But  with  the  "  Toleration  Bill "  came  a  measure  which  The  "Bin 
could  not  be  regarded  so  complacently.  The  "  Bill  for  ^°^  "^^^o^- 
Union"  was  designed  by  the  Whigs  to  revolutionize 
the  Anglican  system,  on  the  pretext  of  giving  Noncon- 
formity further  indulgence.  For  subscription  to  the 
Articles  this  bill  proposed  to  substitute  the  following 
confession: — "  I  do  approve  of  the  doctrine  and  worship 
and  government  of  the  Church  of  England  by  law 
established,  as  containing  all  things  necessary  to  salva- 
tion, and  I  promise  in  the  exercise  of  my  ministry  to 
preach  and  practise  according  thereunto."  Having 
made  this  confession,  any  Presbyterian  minister  was  to 
be  capacitated  for  holding  Church  preferment,  provided 
he  submitted  to  a  bishop's  imposition  of  hands.  By 
another  clause,  the  sign  of  the  cross  in  Baptism,  the 
employment  of  sponsors,  and  the  practice  of  kneeling 
at  the  Eucharist  were  to  be  made  optional.  Finally 
a  commission  was  demanded  of  thirty  divines  of  royal 
appointment  to  revise  the  Liturgy,  the  canons,  and  the 
constitution  of  the  ecclesiastical  courts.  This  bill 
received  the  support  of  Bishop  Compton  in  the  Lords, 
and  was  there  carried  by  a  small  majority.  It  was 
to  the  House  of  Commons  that  the  Anglican  system 
owed  its  preservation  at  this  crisis.  The  nonconforming 
members  may  have  been  convinced,  as  Lord  Macaulay 
urges,  that  their  ministers  were  better  off  as  blatant 
leaders  of  separatists  than  as  unobtrusive  pastors  in 
poor  benefices.  But  this  does  not  account  for  the 
rejection  of  the  bill,  for  the  majority  of  the  members 
were  not  Puritans.  It  was  thrown  out  by  the  loyal  Thrown  out 
Churchmen  in  the  House,  the  men  who,  as  Bishop  churchmen 
Burnet  says,  "  were  much  offended  with  the  bill,  as  <?omions. 


440  ECCLESIA    ANGLICANA. 

CHAP,      containinsf  matters   relative  to  the   Church  in  which 

XVII. 

— --^     the  representative   body  of   the  clergy  had  not  been 
so  much  as  advised  with." 
The  king         Thus  reminded  of  the  existence  of  Convocation,  which 

forced  to        it,  .  t       .  i        . 

summon      had  been  ignored  since  the  irregular  summons  of  the 
tion.  Convention    Parliament,   the   king   decided    that   the 

clerical  representatives  should  be  summoned  in  the 
usual  way  with  the  next  Parliament.  Meanwhile  a 
commission  of  ten  bishops  and  twenty  other  divines 
was  to  be  appointed  to  prepare  a  scheme  of  revision 
for  their  acceptance.  Dean  Tillotson's  list  of  changes 
which  would  "  probably  be  made "  by  the  commis- 
sion shows  what  sort  of  improvements  were  desired 
The  com-  by  the  Latitudinarians.  It  includes  the  items,  "all 
ceremonies  to  be  made  indifferent:"  "assent  and  consent 


revision. 


to  be  taken  away ;  a  promise  to  submit  to  the  doctrine 
and  discipline  of  the  Church  substituted ; "  "  foreign 
orders  to  be  admitted ;  "  "a  form  of  conditional  ordi- 
nation to  be  adopted."  The  prospect  of  these  revo- 
lutionary measures  drove  all  High  Churchmen  from 
the  commission.  The  residue  met  to  endorse  a  sweep- 
ing scheme  of  alteration,  which  was  to  be  recommended 
to  Convocation.  The  Prayer-book  was  to  be  mutilated 
into  accord  with  Latitudinarianism.  "Priest"  was 
to  be  altered  to  "minister,"  the  Absolution  in  the 
Visitation  of  the  Sick  struck  out,  kneeling  at  the  Holy 
Communion  made  optional,  and  almost  all  the  Collects 
were  to  be  removed  in  favour  of  Bishop  Patrick's  own 
compositions.  Fortunately  the  parochial  clergy  were 
roused  to  the  importance  of  the  pending  issue.  The 
returns  for  Convocation  were  watched  with  the  greatest 
interest.  They  produced  an  assembly  determined  that 
■KT       ^^o«  the    Church   should    not    be    undermined    under    the 

Nov.,  Icow, 

convoca-     insidious   pretext   of  "  comprehension."      By  its  firm- 


JAMES  II.    TO   GEORGE  I  441 

ness  the  levelling  spirit  of  the  courtier  prelates  was 
successfully  resisted.  It  ceded  nothing  more  than  a 
vote  of  thanks  to  his  maiesty  for  his  care  of  the  Church  tjon  re- 

,  "^  .  .        fuses  its 

of  England,  and  Dr.  Tillotson,  now  Archbishop  desig-  sanction, 
nate  of  Canterburj^  vowed  that  he  would  have  nothing 
more  to  do  with  Convocations. 

It  may  certainly  be  doubted  whether  the  revolu- 
tionary measures  of  the  party  now  in  the  ascendant 
would  not  have  been  more  detrimental  to  the  new 
dynasty  than  to  the  Church.  The  nonjuring  party, 
which  already  numbered  some  of  the  most  eminent 
English  divines,  would  have  been  furnished  with  a 
just  pretext  for  regarding  the  Establishment  as  schis- 
matic, and  doubtless  half  the  country  would  have 
renounced  the  new  dynasty  in  defence  of  the  old  form 
of  faith.  The  whole  scheme  was  as  discreditable  to 
the  policy  of  Tillotson  and  Burnet  as  to  their  Church- 
manship.  As  it  was,  the  nonjuror  party  discredited 
itself  by  a  policy  of  non-intervention.  Its  leaders  stood 
sullenly  aloof  from  the  fray,  seemingly  indifferent 
whether  the  Church  was  Presbyterianized  or  not. 

Tillotson  presided  three  years  at  Canterbury.     The  Tiiiotsons 

\  encroach- 

northern    primacy   was    given    to    Dr.    Sharp,    a   far  ments 
worthier  son  of  the  Church.     Tillotson  was  renowned  church's 
as  a  rhetorician,  but   his  regime  was  neither   popular  a.d.  leai- 
nor  advantageous.     It  is  plain  that  he  cared  nothing 
for  the  rights,  and  little  for  the  doctrinal  princij)les  of 
the  Anglican  Church.     Anarchists,  both  political  and 
religious,  often  prove  the  greatest  tyrants  when  placed 
in  office.     Tillotson,  convinced  that  Convocation  would 
not  accommodate   him   by  levelling  down,  took  care 
that  it  should  not  be  allowed  to  meet.     The  principle 
of  governing  the  Church  by  royal  "Injunctions"  was 
revived,   and    a   few   courtier    bishops   assumed    that 


442 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


AD,  1694. 

The  "Con- 
vocation 
Contro- 
versy." 
A.D.1697. 


Convoca- 
tion again 
allo-wed 
to  act. 


Tne  Lo-wer 
at  issue 
■with  the 
Upper 
House. 


direction  which  should  have  been  in  the  hands  of  the 
whole  clerical  body.  This  state  of  affairs  continued 
when  Tillotson  was  succeeded  by  Tenison.  It  at 
last  gave  rise  to  the  "  Convocation  Controversy." 

Sir  Bartholomew  Shower,  a  Jacobite,  began  this  con- 
troversy by  publishing  his  "  Letter  to  a  Convocation 
Man."  Herein  it  was  urged  not  only  that  the  growth 
of  heretical  opinions  at  this  time  demanded  the  meeting 
of  Convocation,  but  that  the  king  had  no  more  power 
to  silence  the  clerical  than  the  lay  representatives,  and 
that  it  was  really  the  law  that  Convocations  should 
meet  as  often  as  Parliaments.  Dr.  Wake  answered 
the  "  Letter."  Atterbury  wrote  on  the  side  of  Shower ; 
the  opposite  cause  was  maintained  by  Burnet,  Hody, 
and  Kennett.  Though  the  legal  prerogatives  of  Con- 
vocation were  not  accurately  stated  by  its  champions, 
the  injustice  under  which  the  clergy  suffered  was 
sufficiently  plain.  The  populace  sided  with  them, 
and  the  Government  dared  not  continue  the  anomaly. 
The  writ  summoning  Convocation  was  reluctantly 
issued  in  February,  1701.  It  was  soon  apj)arent  that 
the  Lower  House  was  animated  by  no  friendly  feelings 
towards  the  Whig  bishops,  who  had  so  ill  defended 
the  Church's  liberties,  and  that  its  rights  would  be 
asserted  on  the  grounds  taken  by  Shower  and  Atter- 
burj^  It  would  not  be  prorogued  at  Tenison's  bidding, 
arguing  that  the  archbishops  had  no  more  right  to 
prorogue  the  Lower  House  than  the  Lord  Chancellor 
to  prorogue  the  Commons.  It  undertook  a  subject  of 
conference,  projprio  motu,  to  be  afterwards  laid  before 
the  Upper  House,  just  as  a  Bill  is  sent  from  the 
Commons  to  the  Lords.  The  dispute  in  connection 
with  this  assertion  of  rights  lasted  till  the  end  of  the 
reign. 


JAMES  IL    TO   GEORGE  I.  443 

While  William's  inability  to  appreciate  the  position      chap. 
of   the  English  Church  was   thus  fruitful  in  contro-     ^^ 
versies,    the    change    of    dynasty   was    productive   of 
happier   results   in  the  encouragement   given   to   the 
cause    of    morality    and     Christian    devotion.      With 
James  II.  there  passed  away  for  a  time  the  licentious- 
ness and  profanity  which  for  many  years  had  disgraced 
the  English  court.     From  the  religious  associations  for 
reformation  of  manners  and  encouragement  of  devotion, 
which  had  been  formed  in  the  reign  of  Charles  II., 
there  now  sprang  two  societies  which  still  claim  the 
support  of  Churchmen.      The   Society  for  Promoting  roTindation 
Christian  Knowledge  dates  its  charter  from  1698;  its  s.p.aK 
offshoot,  the  Society  for  the  Propagation  of  the  Gospel,  ands.p.a. 
from  1701.    They  owe  their  existence  to  the  zeal  of  five 
devout    men — Lord    Guildford,    Sir    H.    Mackworth, 
Justice  Hook,  Colonel  Colchester,  and  Dr.  Bray. 

The  prospect  brightened  on  the  accession  of  Anne.  Theciiurch 

•  1T1  -i-i  ••!        under 

I  he  new  sovereign  had  been  trained  m  the  principles  Queen 
of  the  Church.     Her  intellect  was  inferior,  but  she  was 
pious  and   liberal.     She  at  once  showed  herself  able 
to   sympathize   with   the   grievances    of  the   working 
clergy.      One  of  these  was  the  method  of  disposing 
of  patronage.     William  had,  in  the  earlier  part  of  his 
reign,  allowed  Queen  Mary  to  appoint  to  ecclesiastical 
dignities   as    she   wished,    and    she    appears   to    have 
exercised  her  privilege  with  characteristic  discretion. 
But  after  her  death  the  king  appointed  a  committee  a.d.  i694. 
of  six  bishops,  to  which  his  patronage  was  entrusted, 
and  preferment  was  henceforward  the  reward  of  Lati- 
tudinarian    divinity  and  Whig   politics.     One   of  the  Aboution 
first  acts  of  Queen  Anne  was  to  relieve  this  commis-  committee 
sion  of  their  functions.      Archbishop   Sharp  was  de-  ferments, 
puted  to   preach  the  coronation  sermon,  and  a  Whig 


444  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

CHAP,      minority  in  the  new  Parliament  argued  that  Toryism 

v^^"'_.    had    regained   its    ascendency    in    the    constituencies 

as  well  as   at  court.     In    1705    the  military  successes 

of  Marlborough  and  the  extraordinary  influence  of  his 

wife  at  court  restored  the  Whig  party  to  place  and 

royal  favour  for  a  while.     But  the  case  of  Dr.  Sache- 

verell  was  sufficient  to  rekindle  a  flame  of  Anglican 

enthusiasm.     The   Parliament   of  1710  was  strong  in 

Tories  and  High  Churchmen,  and  that  of  1713,  though 

containing  much  of  the  Whig  element,  was  even  more 

conspicuous  than  its  predecessor  for  its  zealous  regard 

for  the  Church's  interests.     At  no  time  was  the  Church 

more  prosperous  and  more  useful  than  during  the  reign 

of  Queen  Anne. 

Restitution      The  incident  in  this  reisrn  of  most  interest  to  well- 

ofthe  .  .  °         . 

first-fruits   wishcrs  of  the  English  Church  is  the  act  of  justice  by 

A.D.  1704.'  which  the  queen  restored  the  first-fruits  and  tenths 
of  benefices,  which  Henry  VIII.  and  all  succeeding 
sovereigns  (with  the  honourable  exception  of  Mary) 
had  treated  as  a  royal  perquisite.  This  proceeding, 
accompanied  by  the  carriage  in  Parliament  of  a  Bill 
so  far  repealing  the  "  Statute  of  Mortmain  "  as  to  allow 
testamentary  benefactions  for  the  augmentation  of 
benefices,  was  the  first  attempt  to  cope  with  a  crying 
scandal  in  the  Establishment.  Ever  since  the  Eeforma- 
tion  England  had  been  disgraced  by  the  poverty  of  her 
clergy  and  the  conferring  of  Holy  Orders  on  men  of 

Queen         little  learning  and  low  social  status.     The  establish- 

Bounty        mcut   of  the  fund  known  as  Queen   Anne's   Bounty, 

^^  ■  for    the    amelioration    of  poor   benefices,    marks    the 

beginning  of  a  new  era  in  the  clerical  status.     The 

profession   of  a   clergyman  soon   became   that   of   an 

educated  gentleman. 

tion^°^*'         ^^^   proceedings   in    Convocation    throughout    this 


A.D.  1706. 


JAMES  II.    TO   GEORGE  /.  445 

reign  gave  proof  that  William's  attempt  to  silence  the 
voice  of  the  Church  had  not  been  forgotten.  The 
Lower  House  continually  discredited  itself  by  factious 
opposition  to  the  dignitaries.  A  "  Eepresentation " 
made  to  the  Upper  House  in  February,  1704,  animad- 
verted with  just  severity  on  the  negligence  of  the 
bishops,  and  consequent  upgrowth  of  abuses  and  irre- 
gularities. But  the  spirit  in  which  such  reflections 
were  made  was  that  of  censoriousness  rather  than  of 
godly  zeal.  So  offensive  to  the  queen  was  the  tone  of 
the  Lower  House  that  she  sanctioned  its  irregular  pro- 
rogation by  the  archbishop  during  the  sitting  of  Par- 
liament. After  the  Tory  reaction  Convocation  was 
allowed  to  resume  its  functions,  but  the  queen  sent  a  a.d.  1711. 
catalogue  of  subjects  on  which  it  was  free  to  debate. 
These  were — (1.)  The  growth  of  infidelity  and  heres3^ 
In  connection  with  this  subject  Convocation  censured 
the  doctrine  of  William  Whiston,  a  crazy  Cambridge 
professor,  who  gave  the  so-called  "  Apostolical  Con- 
stitutions "  the  dignity  of  inspired  Scriptures.  (2.)  The 
course  of  proceedings  in  excommunications.  (3.)  The 
preparation  of  forms  for  receiving  converts  from  the 
Koman  Church  and  for  restoring  the  lapsed.  (4.) 
Regulations  as  to  the  duty  of  rural  deans.  (5.)  Forms 
for  terriers  of  glebe  lands.  (6.)  Eegulations  as  to 
matrimonial  licences.  Practical  results  were  attained 
in  regard  to  these  subjects  in  this  Convocation  and  its 
successor  of  1713.  The  last  business  done  was  the 
consideration  of  Dr.  Clarke's  Arian  publications. 

Although  the  "Toleration  Act"  had  given  the  Non- The  sacra- 
conformists  liberty  to  assemble  for  worship  in  their  con- 
venticles, the  "  Test  Act "  was  still  in  force,  compelling 
all  officers,  civil  and  military,  to  receive   the   Lord's 
Supper    according   to   the    rites     of    the     Church    of 


mental 
test. 


446 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


CHAP.      England.     The  existence  of  this   test  could  not   but 
3^^     tend   to  the  disparagement   of   the  sacrament,  which 
was  often  received  by  rakes  and  sceptics  as  a  "  picklock 
to  a  place."     It  was  nevertheless  defended  by  the  High 
Churchmen  of  the  day,  among  whom  Church  principle 
too  often  took  the  form  of  ecclesiastical  Toryism.     The 
only  abuse  which  they  recognized  in  connexion  with  the 
test  was  its  evasion  by  the  "  occasional  conformists." 
Men  who  were  really  Dissenters  were  wont  to  qualify 
for  office  by  communicating,  and  then  continue  to  fre- 
quent conventicles.     This  inconsistency  was  made  the 
The  "Act    most  of  by  the  Tory  gentry.     Three  times  in  Anne's 
Occasional  first   Parliament   the    Commons    passed    bills   against 
formity  "     occasional  conformity,  fining  officials  who  should  attend 
a  conventicle,  and  compelling  them  to  qualify  by  the 
reception  of  the  Holy  Communion  thrice  a  j^ear.     On 
each  occasion  the  bill  was  rejected  in  the  Lords,  where 
Bishop  Burnet  opposed  the  revival  of  persecuting  legis- 
lation as  impolitic.     So  strong,  however,  was  the  feel- 
ing against  the  Dissenters  in  1711  that  this  Bill  was 
passed  in  both  Houses  without  a  division. 

No  less  retrograde  in  tendency  was  the  Act  of  1713, 
suppressing  Dissenting  schools.  By  this  Act  every 
tutor  and  master  might  be  summoned  to  show  a  cer- 
tificate that  he  had  received  the  Holy  Communion 
within  the  last  year.  A  subscription  of  conformity 
and  a  licence  from  the  diocesan  were  also  required. 
This  Act  would,  in  fact,  have  put  Dissenting  school- 
masters in  the  plight  of  the  sequestered  clergy  in  1655, 
under  Cromwell's  memorable  edict.  It  received  the 
royal  assent,  but  the  queen's  death  prevented  it  from 
coming  into  operation. 

In  1705-6  the  rise  of  the  Marlboroughs,  and  the 
consequent  exclusion  of  High  Churchmen  from  office, 


The 

"  Schism 

Bin." 


JAMES   II.  TO   GEORGE  I.  447 

produced  in  the  country  a  jealous  dread  of  Noncon-  chap. 
formist  encroachment,  which  attained  the  dignity  of  a  ^^L^ 
panic.  Everywhere  the  cry  was  heard,  "The  Church  "churcilin 
in  danger."  Dr.  Drake's  pamphlet,  "The  Memorial  ^^''^®'"' • 
of  the  Church  of  England,"  was  an  incentive  to  this 
feeling  of  insecurity.  So  great  was  the  excitement 
that  a  day  was  appointed  for  discussing  in  the  Upper 
House  whether  the  Church  was  in  danger  or  not. 
Lord  Rochester,  the  Bishop  of  London,  and  the  Arch- 
bishop of  York  argued  a  state  of  peril  from  the  estab- 
lishment of  an  aggressive  Presbyterianism  in  Scotland, 
from  the  immoral  and  infidel  literature  in  circulation, 
and  from  the  spread  of  Dissenting  academies.  Burnet 
and  the  Whig  bishops  denied  that  there  was  ground 
for  alarm,  and  in  this  opinion  a  majority  in  both 
Houses  concurred.  The  "  Memorial "  was  denounced 
as  a  scandalous  libel  by  a  royal  proclamation.  All  her 
Majesty's  subjects  were  summoned  to  assist  in  the 
attempt  to  apprehend  its  printer.  But  it  soon  ap- 
peared that  the  country  did  not  share  the  convictions 
of  Parliament  with  regard  to  the  Church's  security. 

An  immense  amount  of  pulpit  and  pamphlet  elo- 
quence was  beii]g  expended  at  this  time  on  the  question 
of  divine  right  and  passive  obedience.  These  two  doc- 
trines, which  had  necessarily  been  in  abeyance  during 
the  reign  of  William,  were  not  unfavourably  received 
by  the  present  sovereign.  Blackball,  a  Tory  bishop, 
openly  asserted  them  in  a  sermon  before  the  queen, 
and  defended  them  in  a  pamphlet  controversy  with 
Hoadly.  The  Whig  ministers,  unconscious  of  their 
unpopularity,  determined  that  such  teaching  should  be 
suppressed  with  a  high  hand. 

The  person  selected  to  be  the  martyr  of  Toryism  was  j, 
Dr.  Henry   Sacheverell,  fellow  of  Magdalen,  Oxford,  vereu. 


448  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

CHAP,  and  chaplain  of  S.  Saviour's.  In  a  sermon  preached 
^^^^'  before  the  Lord  Mayor,  and  sold  largely,  Sacheverell 
Nov,  1709.  showed  how  the  Church  was  "  in  perils  among  false 
hretJiren"  to  wit,  those  ministers  who  had  betrayed  the 
Church  to  the  Dissenters,  and  were  still  menacing  both 
the  civil  and  the  ecclesiastical  rights  of  the  clergy. 
On  the  complaint  of  Mr.  Dolben  in  the  House  of 
Commons,  it  was  voted  that  Sacheverell  should  be  im- 
peached before  the  Lords  for  the  following  high  crimes 
and  misdemeanours: — (1.)  Asserting  that  the  Eevo- 
lution  was  effected  by  means  odious  and  unjustifiable. 
(2.)  Condemning  that  toleration  which  had  been  sanc- 
tioned by  law.  (3.)  Asserting  that  the  Church  was 
in  danger.  (4.)  Maligning  the  queen's  advisers  as 
false  brethren  and  traitors  to  the  constitution.  The 
trial  in  Westminster  Hall  began  on  February  27.     On 

A.D.  1710.  ^ 

March  20  a  majority  of  the  peers  (sixty -nine  against 
fifty-two)  voted  Sacheverell  guilty.  InHhis  vote  seven 
bishops  concurred.  It  was  decreed  by  way  of  penalty 
that  the  offensive  sermon  should  be  burnt  by  the  com- 
mon hangman,  and  that  Sacheverell  should  be  sus- 
pended from  preaching  for  three  years.  A  motion 
that  he  should  be  incapacitated  for  preferment  was 
Popularity  defeated.  Throughout  the  trial  the  populace  had  given 
ca^p5n-''  unmistakable  proof  of  its  Tory  and  High  Church 
cipies.  proclivities.  The  issue  was  hailed  with  a  tremendous 
outburst  of  enthusiasm,  the  sentence  being  far  less 
rigorous  than  was  expected.  Bonfires  and  illumina- 
tions, and  a  crop  of  addresses  magnifj^ing  the  royal 
prerogative,  testified  to  the  popularity  of  Sacheverell's 
opinions.  The  queen  did  not  hesitate  to  express  her 
own  sympathies.  She  at  once  preferred  Sacheverell  to 
the  rich  living  of  S.  Andrew's,  Holborn,  and  shortly 
afterwards  to  that  of  Salatin,  in  Shropshire.     A  disso- 


JAMES  11.  TO  GEORGE  I.  449 

lution  of  Parliament  was  succeeded  by  the  return  of  a      chap. 
House  in  which  Tories  and  High  Churchmen  largely      ^.^}l. 
predominated.     The  popularity  of  Toryism  continued 
unimpaired   until   the   end    of  the   reign.      The   new 
Parliament  paid  its  debt  to  the  Church  by  a  munificent 
provision  for  the  purposes  of  worship.     In  the  address 
to  the  queen  it  was  stated  that  the  want  of  churches 
had  contributed  to  increase  schism  and  irreligion.     A  provision 
grant  of  £350,000  was  therefore  voted  to  provide  for  eh^cles. 
the  erection  of  fifty   new  churches,  under  the    direc- 
tion  of    Sir   Christopher    Wren,    in   London    and    its 
vicinity. 

The  Latitudinarian  impulse,  however  favourable  to 
the  cause  of  toleration,  had  been  of  little  service  to  the 
spread  of  fixed  religious  principles.     Heresy  and  in- 
fidelity were  supported  by  many  able  writers,  some  of 
whom  will  receive  further  notice  in  the  next  chapter. 
Literary  ability,  however,  was  by  no  means  all  on  one  Literary 
side.     Bull  and   Beveridge  were   among   the  bishops,  uont^o%he 
the  one  the  champion  of  the  Church's  Creeds,  the  other  rei&n. 
the  author  of  valuable  devotional  works  on  "  Public 
Prayer,"    "  Frequent    Prayer,"    and    "  Eeligion    and 
Christian  Life."    Prideaux's  "Connection  of  Sacred  and 
Pagan  History,"  Bingham's  "Antiquities  of  the  Chris- 
tian Church,"  and  Wall's  "  History  of  Infant  Baptism  " 
were  equally  important  additions  to  Church  literature. 
The  genius  of  Swift  was  devoted  to  the  cause  of  eccle- 
siastical  Toryism,    and   the   purer   pages   of  Addison 
advocated  that   of   Christian    morality.      This   period 
leaves  the  Church  at  her  highest  point  of  influence.  The 
Her  celebrity  was  such  that  Frederick  L,  by  the  advice  uons^with 
of  Jablouski  his  chaplain,  caused  the  English  Lituro-y  *^^^®^"^^^ 

•■•  o  &«/    Protes- 

to  be  translated  into  German.     It  was  even  hoped  that  tants. 
the  Apostolical   succession   would  be  restored   to  the 

2  G 


450  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

CHAP.     Lutheran  and  Calvinistic  bodies  by  the  agency  of  the 


XVII. 


-'-^  Church  of  England,  as  a  first  step  towards  union. 
With  this  end  in  view,  Dodwell  wrote  his  "  Paraenesis 
to  Foreigners"  in  1704.  Archbishop  Sharp,  Bishop 
Smalridge,  Mr.  E.  Hales,  and  Dr.  Ernest  Grabe,  an 
Anglicized  Prussian,  were  the  most  active  promoters 
of  the  negotiations.  Archbishop  Tenison  regarded 
them  with  apathy.  The  conferences  on  this  subject 
A..D.  1713.    were  brought  to  a  close  by  the  death  of  Frederick. 


THE   GEORGIAN  PERIOD,  451 


I 


CHAPTER   XVIII. 

%\it  C&corgian  pcrioti. 

A.D.  1714-1820. 

Fatal  effects  of  the  change  of  dynasty — Degeneracy  of  bishops — Suppression  of 
Convocation— Wake's  negotiations  with  the  Gallican  Church— The  "  Bangorian 
Controversy  "—The  doctrine  of  the  Trinity  impugned— Spread  of  heresy  among 
Dissenters— The  "Salter's  Hall  Controversy  "—The  Regium  Bonum— The  so- 
called  "  Deists  "—Their  chief  writers—The  opponents  of  the  Deists — Sermons  on 
the  reasonableness  of  Christianity— Hatred  of  enthusiasm— The  sects  as  stagnant 
as  the  Church— Prevalence  of  indiiferentism— The  Methodist  movement— John 
Wesley — His  talents  and  temperament — His  piety  attributable  to  Anglo- 
Catholic  influences — The  Oxford  Methodists— The  mission  to  Georgia — Mora- 
vian influences — George  Whitefleld— Sensational  sermons — Open-air  preaching 
— The  Church  opposed  to  Methodism — f  he  Methodists  sound  Churchmen— Course 
of  the  Methodist  movement — The  Calvinistic  Methodists  own  themselves 
seceders— Wesley's  mock  consecration — Wesley  dies  deprecating  secession 
—But  his  followers  split  into  sects— The  Evangelical  revival— Its  character 
— Its  strength  is  in  the  parochial  clergy — Its  institutions  void  of  system— The 
Church  not  stimulated  by  the  Evangelical  movement— The  bishops — The 
clergy — The  churches. 

The  accession  of  a  foreign  prince  who  had  departed 
from  Lutheranism  "  to  qualify  himself  for  the  crown,"  ^ 
was  generally  regarded  as  an  ill  omen  for  the  Church. 
The  Legitimist  cause  had  gained  strength  during  the  patai 
years  1710-1714,  and  now  found  special  favour  among;  ^^^^^^°^ 

^  X  o  the  change 

the      High    Church    clergy.      Atterbury,    Bishop    of  o^  dynasty. 
Rochester,    implored     Bolingbroke   to    proclaim   King 
James  III.  at  Charing  Cross  as  Queen  Anne's  successor.^ 

'  Atterbury,  English  Advice  to  the  Freeholders  of  England,  1714. 
*  Atterbury  engaged  in  a  treasonable  correspondence  with  the  exiled  house 
•which  brought  on  him  a  sentence  of  banishment  in  1723. 


452 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


CHAP. 
XVIII. 


The  Jacobite  rising  of  the  following  j^ear  doubtless  had 
the  sympathies  of  a  large  majority  of  the  clergy.  On 
the  other  hand,  the  Whigs  and  Dissenters  hastened  to 
belaud  the  immoral  and  uninteresting  foreigner  as  "  one 
of  the  honestest  men  and  one  of  the  wisest  princes  in  the 
world,"  "  the  darling  of  heaven,"  "  endued  with  true 
piety,  fortitude,  temperance,  prudence,  justice,  etc."^ 
Both  parties  rightly  read  the  signs  of  the  times.  The 
new  dynasty  brought  to  the  Dissenters  relief,  to  the 
Eomanists  and  nonjurors  fresh  disabilities,  and  to  the 
Church  a  condition  of  paralysis  or  enforced  inertia, 
which  was  at  its  worst  at  the  time  of  the  Methodist 
movement,  and  was  not  thrown  off  for  more  than  a 
century.  On  the  one  hand,  the  "Schism  Act  "  and  "  Occa- 
sional Conformity  Act"  were  repealed  (1718)  and  the 
Test  and  Corporation  Acts  modified.  On  the  other 
hand,  the  Houses  of  Convocation  were  suppressed,  and 
the  clergy,  thus  deprived  of  all  semblance  of  self-govern- 
ment, were  subjected  to  episcopal  politicians  who  un- 
blushingly  neglected  their  duties,  and  sometimes  never 
entered  their  dioceses.  Scholars,  scientists,  philoso- 
phers, and  rhetoricians  were  still  to  be  found  on  the 
episcopal  bench.  But  attachment  to  the  House  of 
Hanover  was  usually  the  one  essential  for  promotion. 
And  this  attachment  of  itself  precluded  regard  for  the 
Church's  interests  and  sympathy  with  the  parochial 
clergy.  Charles  Stuart's  informant.  Dr.  Wagstaffe,  pro- 
bably did  not  misrepresent  the  condition  of  the  Church, 
A.D.  1745.  when  he  informed  him  that  he  "was  not  to  judge  of  the 
English  clergy  by  the  bishops,  who  were  not  promoted 
for  their  piety  and  learning,  but  for  writing  pamphlets, 
being  active  at  elections,  and  voting  as  the  ministry 


Degene- 
racy of 
bishops 


'    See  Abbey  and  Overton,  English  Church  in  the  Eighteenth  Century,  vol.  i. 
p.  98  ;  stanhope,  Hist.,  vol.  i.  p.  94. 


THE   GEORGIAN  PERIOD.  453 

directed  them."  ^  In  the  middle  of  the  century  true  chap. 
"  overseers  "  of  the  Church  were  rarely  to  be  found,  and  31^ 
the  episcopal  body  rather  deteriorated  than  otherwise 
during  the  period  of  the  "  Evangelical  "  revival.  The 
idea  of  a  bishopric  being  a  prize,  rather  than  a  re- 
sponsible post,  largely  obtained  at  the  beginning  of  the 
present  century. 

The  ministry  of  the  new  sovereign  perceived  that  the  suppres- 
strength  of  Anglicanism  lay  in  Convocation.  The  re-  convoca- 
presentative  body  of  the  Church  was  therefore  sup- 
pressed. The  story  of  this  monstrous  invasion  of  con- 
stitutional rights  is  as  follows  : — Hoadly,  already  noto- 
rious as  an  Erastian,  had  been  promoted  by  George  I. 
to  the  bishopric  of  Bangor.  In  March,  1717,  he  pub- 
lished a  sermon  on  the  "  Nature  of  the  Kinscdom  or 
Church  of  Christ."  He  argued  from  the  text,  S.  John 
xviii.  36,  that  Christ  had  never  intended  to  establish  a 
visible  kingdom,  such  as  the  Catholic  Church,  and  he 
accordingly  impugned  all  tests  of  orthodoxy  and  forms 
of  ecclesiastical  government.  Such  a  betrayal  of  the 
Church's  cause  naturally  infuriated  the  suppressed 
High  Church  clergy.  As  an  admirer  has  expressed  it, 
Hoadly's  sermon  "was  in  fact  a  proclamation  of  the  un- 
christian character  of  the  Church  of  which  he  himself 
was  a  bishop."  ^  The  opinion  of  nine-tenths  of  the  Angli- 
can clergy  was  doubtless  that  expressed  in  the  "  Re- 
presentation "  sent  by  the  Lower  to  the  Upper  House  of 
Convocation.  This  charged  Hoadly  with  undermining 
the  religious  constitution  of  England  and  endangering 
all  established  authority.  It  implored  the  prelates  to 
"  vindicate  the  honour  of  God  and  religion "  by  an 
outspoken  condemnation  of  the  sermon.  Before  the  Nov.  ss. 
Upper   House  replied  the   ministry   gave  orders  that 

'  Ewald,  Life  of  Prince  Charles  Stuart,  vol.  i.  p.  217.       -  Free  Churches,  p.  292. 


454  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

CHAP,     Convocation     should  be  prorogued.     A   persistent    re- 
> — ^^    fusal  to  renew  the  licence  for  its  conveDtion  gave  this 
prorogation  the   effect  of  an   act  of  suppression.     Its 
creditable  denunciation  of  Hoadly  was  the  last  act  of 
the  eighteenth-century  Church  in  council.     Not  till  a 
hundred  and  thirty- seven  years  had  lapsed  was  Con- 
vocation   even    allowed    to    debate.      The    impugned 
prelate,  after  holding  the  see  of  Bangor  six  years  with- 
out once  entering  the  diocese,  was  translated  first  to 
Hereford,  then  to   Salisbury,  and   died    as  Bishop    of 
Winchester  in  1761. 
Wake's  ne-      It  appears  strange  to  find  in  so  eminently  Protestant 
with  the      a  reign  as  that  of  George  I.  the  last  record  of  peaceful 
cSuJch.^      negotiations  with   the  Roman  Catholic  body.      Arch- 
bishop Wake,  however,  was  a  man  of  different  calibre 
from  the  typical  Georgian  prelates;    one    who    could 
sympathize   with  the  Gallican   body — the    Church    of 
Bossuet,  Pascal,  and  Fenelon — in  its  struggle  to  gain 
an  independent  footing  as  a  national  Church.     Wake 
had    already  distinguished  himself  by  his  defence  of 
the  Anglican  position  in  a  literary  war  with  Bossuet. 
Letters  passed  in  the  year  1717  between  the  primate 
and  Du    Pin,    head  of  the  theological  faculty   at  the 
Sorbonne,  with  a  view  to   the   union  of  the  Anglican 
and  Gallican  bodies.     The  scheme  would  doubtless  have 
had  the  good  wishes  of  many  an  English  Churchman, 
but  at  no  time  was  there  less  hope  of  its  succeeding. 
The  deaths  of  Du  Pin  and  De  Gerardin  put  an  end  to 
the  negotiations.     In  France  papal  absolutism  gained 
the  day.     In  England    the  vulgar   prejudice    against 
Eoman    Catholicism    gained    in    intensity,    and    was 
humoured  by  severer  disabling  Acts.    When  in  the  year 
1778  it  was  proposed  to  render  these  less  rigorous,  a 
storm  of  fury  broke  out  in  Scotland,  spread  to  England, 
and  culminated  in  the  Gordon  riots. 


THE   GEORGIAN  PERIOD.  455 

Hoadly's  sermon  was  attacked  and  defended  in  the     chap. 
innumerable  pamphlets  of  the  "  Bangorian  Controversy."     xviii^ 
The   chief  writers  on  the   Church    side  were   Bishop  The  "Ban- 
Sherlock  and  the  celebrated   noniuror   William    Law.  go^i^n 

•J  Contro- 

Five  of  the  royal  chaplains  incurred  dismissal  for  versy." 
impugning  the  doctrines  of  the  Erastian  prelate. 
Controversies  of  more  vital  importance  were  soon  agi- 
tating the  public  mind.  The  influence  of  the  Latitu- 
dinarians  under  William  has  been  already  noticed. 
Their  lukewarmness  in  Church  matters  restored  this 
party  to  favour  and  importance  on  the  accession  of 
George  I.  It  had  been  drifting  meanwhile  first  to  the 
tenets  of  the  Arians  and  Unitarians,  and  then  to  that 
absolute  negation  of  divine  interposition  which  was 
called  Deism.  As  far  back  as  1685  the  spread  of 
unsound  views  on  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity  had 
evoked  Bull's  famous  defence  of  the  Nicene  Creed. 
Chillingworth  had  gone  perilously  near  Arianism, 
and  Locke  and  Newton  both  inclined  to  this  form  of 
heresy.  But  the  first  notorious  impugners  of  the  The 
doctrine  of  our  first  Article  were  William  Whiston  ofth"^^ 
and  Dr.    Samuel    Clarke.^      Dr.    Clarke's    "  Scriptural  ^^^^*y  i°^- 

^  pugned. 

Doctrine  of  the  Tiinity  "  was  censured  by  tbe  Lower 
House  of  Convocation  in  1714.  Its  author's  quali- 
fied recantation  saved  it  from  incurring  the  same 
fate  in  the  Upper  House.  It  has  been  styled  the  text- 
book of  modern  Arianism.  It  now  secured  "  the  great 
Dr.  Clarke "  a   considerable  rejoutation  in   the   upper 

'  Clarke  had  been  chaplain  to  Moore,  Bishop  of  Norwich,  and  Boyle  Lecturer 
two  years  consecutively.  He  had  been  promoted  under  Anne  to  a  royal  chap- 
laincy and  the  rectory  of  St.  James's,  We!^tminster,  and  had  distinguished  himself 
in  a  controversj^  with  the  elder  Dodwell,  AVhiston  had  also  been  chaplain  to 
Moore,  who  gave  him  the  living  of  Lowestoft.  He  succeeded  Newton  as  Lucasian 
Professor  of  Mathematics,  but  was  subsequently  expelled  the  university.  His 
credulity  in  the  matter  of  the  Apostolical  Constitutions  was  characteristic  :  "  He 
believed  in  everything  except  the  Trinity." 


456  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

CHAP,     classes,    and    the    favour  of    Caroline,   the    queen   of 
^IJ^J'    George  II.     It  was  only  characteristic  of  this  unhappy 
era  that,  some  years  later,  Clarke's  Arian  Prayer-book 
A.D.  1747.   received  the  approval  of  a  primate — Archbishop  Herring. 
Dr.  Clarke  was  answered  by  Dr.  Wells,  Bi.vhop  Gastrell, 
Mr.  Nelson,  and  Dr.  Waterland.     The  last  named  not 
only   demolished    Clarke,    but    left    to  posterity   the 
A.D.  1719.    clearest  and  most  able  exposition  of  the  doctrine  of  the 
Nicene  Creed  that  had  ever  been  published.     This  did 
not  prevent  a   fresh  outbreak   of  controversy  on  the 
doctrine   of  the  Trinity  at  the  close    of    the  century, 
when  Dr.    Priestly,  a  great  natural  philosopher,  who 
had  embraced  Socinianism,  was  confuted  by  Archdeacon 
(afterwards  Bishop)  Horsley  in  the  "  seventeen  letters." 
hereby  °  Among  the  Dissenters  these  new  forms  of  unbelief 

Dissenters  Spread  with    fcarful    celerity.     Dissenting   synods  at 
Exeter,   and    at    Salter's    Hall  in    London,  had    split 
on  the  question  of  rejecting  our  Church's  first  Article. 
The  The    literary  warfare    which    succeeded    was    known 

Hau  Con-     amoug  Disscuters  as  the  "  Salter's  Hall  Controversy." 
roversy.     gpo^^j-^^j-y^    ^    popular  prcachcr,  headed  the  orthodox 
party.     A  form  of  Socinianism  appears  to  have  been 
the  type  of  heresy  adopted  by  the  impugners  of  the 
Article,  who  came  for  the  most  part  from  the  sect  of 
Presbyterians.     Whole  congregations  not  unfrequently 
became    Socinian,    and   transferred   to  the   new   com- 
munion their  chapels  and  endowments.     In  less  than 
half  a   century  "  the  doctrines  of  the  great  founders 
of  Presbyterianism   could  scarcely  be  heard  from  any 
Presbyterian  pulpit."  ^     In  connexion  with  this  con- 
"Reg-ium    trovcrsy  may  be  noticed  the  Begium  Donum,  or  bribe 
Donvim."     ^^^  political  support,  which  the  Presbyterians  secured 
from  Walpole  in  1723,  and  received  for  more  than  a 

'  StougMon,  Religion  in  England,  i.  117. 


THE   GEORGIAN  PERIOD.  457 

century  and  a  quarter.     Similar  grants  had  been  made      chap. 
by  Charles  IT.  and  William  III.     It  now  took  the  form     ^llifL 
of  a  douceur  to  Edmund  Calamy,  on  his  dedicating  a 
volume  of  Salter's  Hall  polemics  to  the  King.     It  con- 
tinued  to  increase  throughout  the  century,   and  was 
£39,746  when  it  was  abolished  in  1863. 

But  the  wave  of  heterodoxy,  where  not  stemmed  by  The  so- 
the  bulwark  of  Catholic  principle,  swept  away  far  f.^eists." 
more  than  the  doctrine  of  the  Saviour's  Divinity.  The 
Latitudinarians  proceeded  to  attack  the  credibility  of 
the  miracles  and  the  possibility  of  a  Divine  revelation. 
It  was  plausibly  urged  that  the  New  Testament  was 
only  Church  literature  such  as  Protestantism  had 
repudiated.  Christianity  was  denounced  as  unphilo- 
sophical  or  demoralizing,  or  as  at  best  effete  and 
unnecessary.  Assailants  of  this  kind  were  usually, 
though  inaccurately,  denominated  "  Deists."     Already  Their 

clii6f 

something  akin  to  Deism  had  been  advocated  by  Lord  writers. 
Herbert  of  Cherbury  and  Thomas  Hobbes  ;  and  in  1696 
Toland's  "  Christianity  not  mysterious  "  had  been  pre- 
sented by  the  grand  jury  of  Middlesex,  and  burnt  by 
the  hangman  in  Dublin.  Shaftesbury  had  followed 
with  his  "  Characteristics  of  Men  and  Manners,"  a  more  a.d.  1713. 
insidious  publication,  which  sapped  the  foundations 
of  Christianity  while  recommending  its  retention  on 
utilitarian  principles.  About  the  same  time  Anthony 
Collins  published  the  "  Discourse  of  Free  Thinking," 
a  work  which  caused  the  greatest  excitement.  Swift, 
Berkeley,  Bentley,  Whiston,  and  Hoadly  all  entered 
the  lists  against  Collins,  who,  far  from  being  silenced, 
produced  an  elaborate  attack  on  the  evidence  from  Old 
Testament  prophecy,  entitled  a  "  Discourse  on  the  a.d.  1724. 
Grounds  and  Eeasonableness  of  the  Christian  Religion." 
Woolston   in  his   "  Six   Discourses   on  the   Miracles " 


458 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


The 

opponents 
of  the 
Deists. 


assumed  the  role  of  a  moderator  between  an  infidel — 
Collins — and  an  apostate — the  Church  of  England. 
The  literal  interpretation  of  the  miracles  was  here 
ridiculed  in  the  coarsest  terms,  and  a  crazy  system  of 
mystical  interpretation  substituted.  Woolston  was  the 
only  Deist  who  suffered  persecution.  He  was  fined 
£100,  imprisoned,  and  required  to  find  securities  in 
large  sums.  The  securities  were  not  forthcoming,  and 
the  Deist  confessor  lingered  in  prison  till  his  death 
in  1731.  Dr.  Tindal  may  be  regarded  as  the  chief 
exponent  of  real  Deism.  In  "  Christianity  as  old  as 
the  Creation  "  he  argues  that  natural  conscience  had 
practically  anticipated  Christianity.  A  revelation  was 
thus  unnecessary  and  was  not  even  to  be  considered 
possible.  The  same  ground  was  taken  by  Dr.  Morgan 
in  the  "Moral  Philosopher,"  and  by  Thomas  Chubb,  in  a 
number  of  tracts  and  essays  written  for  the  lower  orders. 
Another  important  publication  of  the  Deist  school 
was  Bolingbroke's  posthumous  "  Philosophical  Works." 
The  "  First  Philosophy "  sweeps  away  every  part  of 
Christianity  but  its  moral  teaching.  It  leaves  "  a  God 
Omnipotent  and  all-perfect,  but  inconceivable.  .  .  . 
No  particular  providence,  no  future  state,  no  imma- 
terial soul."  ^  In  the  next  generation  "  Deism  "  took 
the  form  of  sneering  unscientific  scepticism.  Of  this 
school  the  chief  representatives  are  Hume,  Gibbon, 
and  Paine.  Hume  was  too  much  of  an  unbeliever  to 
be  even  a  Deist,  and  indignantly  disclaimed  the  title. 

The  answers  to  these  writers  came  to  a  large  extent 
from  the  episcopal  bench,  and  the  achievements  of  the 
eighteenth-century  dignitaries  in  this  regard  to  some 
extent  counterbalance  their  laches  in  other  departments 
of  clerical   work.     The   most   popular   publication  of 

'  Cooke's  Memoirs  of  Lord  Bolingbroke,  ii.  152. 


THE   GEORGIAN  PERIOD.  459 

this  kind  was  probably  Bishop  Sherlock's  "  Trial  of  chap. 
the  Four  "Witnesses."  The  general  credibility  of  the  3Z^^i. 
gospel  history  was  also  ably  maintained  by  Lardner 
the  Socinian.  Able  replies  to  Shaftesbury  were  written 
by  Dr.  Wotton  and  Dr.  Balguy.  Collins  was  well  op- 
posed by  Dr.  Chandler  and  Dr.  Sykes ;  Woolston  by 
Bishops  Gibson,  Smalbroke,  and  Zachary  Pearce. 
Among  the  hundred  and  fifteen  answers  evoked  by 
Tyndal,  Dr.  Conybeare's  is  conspicuous  for  ability,  pre- 
cision, and  dignity.  But  the  most  important  production 
was  the  immortal  "  Analogy  "  of  Bishop  Butler.  This  a.d.  1736. 
also  was  designed  as  an  answer  to  Tindal's  book, 
though  it  is  far  more  extensive  in  its  scope.  High 
rank  must  also  be  given  to  Bishop  Warburton's  "Divine 
Legation  of  Moses,"  a  voluminous  work  of  great  learn- 
ing and  enormous  range,  and  the  more  readable  "  Alci- 
phron"  of  Bishop  Berkeley,  written  in  dialogistic  form. 
Paley's  "  Evidences  "  and  "  Natural  Theology  "  were  a.d.  1794. 
the  answer  to  the  later  generation  of  sceptics,  and  in 
point  of  merit  almost  rival  the  "  Analogy."  Bishop 
Watson  wrote  against  the  same  school  as  Paley,  and 
was  acknowledged  by  Gibbon  to  be  a  worthy  anta- 
ffonist. 

Thouo;h  the  Deists  were   beaten  in  arsrument,  this  sermons  on 
^  ,  ,  ,      ,  .  .        the  reason- 

controversy  exercised  directly  and  indirectly  a  pernicious  abieness  of 

influence  on  the  religion  of  the  century.  The  apolo-  ity. 
gists  found  imitators  in  innumerable  pulpits,  and  the 
"reasonableness"  of  the  Christian  religion  became  the 
favourite  topic  for  preaching.  Christianity  was  accused 
every  Sunday  in  being  excused.  The  stock  of  Augus- 
tine's planting  was  as  little  likely  to  flourish  under 
such  treatment  as  a  tree  which  is  being  continually 
pulled  up  by  the  roots,  nervously  examined,  and  re- 
placed.    The  "reasonableness  "  of  religion  is,  after  all, 


46o  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

CHAP,  an  incentive  of  little  force  in  a  scheme  intended  to 
> — ^-I'  include  the  unreasoning  many.  In  theory — as  an  intel- 
lectual creed,  as  a  proven  moral  system — Christianity 
held  its  own.  But  the  appeal  was  ever  to  the  head 
instead  of  the  heart.  Christianity  was  not  exhibited 
as  an  influence  on  the  emotions,  nor  as  the  root  of 
spiritual  affections.  To  regard  it  in  this  capacity  was 
to  be  guilty  of  "  enthusiasm."  The  practical  result  was 
that  those  who  did  believe  lived  much  as  those  who 
did  not. 
Hatred  Emotioual  religion  was  perhaps  somewhat  discredited 

sfasm.^"^'     ^y  *1^®  influx  of  the  "  Camisards,"   or  "  French   pro- 
phets," who  had  flocked  into  England  after  the  revocation 
A.D.  1706,  of  the  Edict  of  Nantes,  bringing  with  them  a  strange 
system  of  fanaticism,  in  which  may  be  detected  the 
origin  of  some  of   the  vagaries  of   Methodism.     Less 
open  to  the  charge   of   enthusiasm  was   the  teaching 
A.D.  1686-  of  the   great   nonjuror    pietist    William    Law,    whose 
1761.  4  4  Serious    Call,"   perhaps,  did   as   much   for   practical 

Christianity  as  all  the  writings  of  the  apologists. 
Yet  Law  also  appears  to  have  been  infected  by  the 
questionable  systems  of  such  mystics  as  Tauler  and 
Jacob  Behmen. 

Enthusiasm,  however,  was  not  the  predominant  vice 
of  those  who  held  similar  political  and  ecclesiastical 
views  to  Law.  Here,  as  elsewhere,  the  tendenc}''  was 
to  make  religion  subservient  to  political  principle. 
After  the  deaths  of  Bull,  Beveridge,  Ken,  and  Nelson, 
High  Churchmanship  rapidly  degenerated  into  ecclesi- 
astical Toryism,^  and  the  religious  life  of  the  party 
was  infected  by  the  general  blight  of  apathy  and  in- 
differentism. 
The  sects  as      The  Nonconformist  sects  which  had  contributed  so 

'  English  Church  in  the  Eighteenth  Century,  i.  136. 


THE   GEORGIAN  PERIOD.  461 

largely  to  the  ranks  of  infidelity  were,  as  might  be  chap. 
ex]3ected,  even  more  devoid  of  vitality  and  earnestness  v — ^1^ 
than  the  Church.    In  1740,  Mosheim  writes,  "those  who  stagnantas 

the  Churcli, 

are  best  acquainted  with  the  English  nation  tell  us 
that  the  Dissenting  interest  declines  from  day  to  day." 
He  regards  this  as  the  effect  of  the  lenity  and  mode- 
ration practised  by  the  rulers  of  the  Church.  It  would 
appear,  rather,  that  the  distinctive  doctrines  of  the 
Church  were  so  toned  down  by  the  Georgian  prelates 
that  there  was  not  much  left  to  dissent  from.  Ela- 
borate schemes  for  levelling  down  to  the  plane  of 
Nonconformity  were  broached  from  time  to  time  with 
the  approval  of  bishops.  The  ministries,  however, 
mindful  of  the  effect  of  the  "  Church  in  danger  "  cry 
in  1710,  declined  to  meddle  in  such  matters.  The 
question  of  '■  comprehension  "  was  happily  shelved. 

The  limits  of  this  work  preclude  a  detailed  account  Prevalence 
of  a  period  of  religious  indifferentism  to  which,  despite  enusm. 
its  controversial  productions,  the  earnest  Anglican  re- 
verts with  shame  and  sorrow.  It  is  easy  to  conceive 
how  the  State  policy  which  silenced  the  Church's 
representative  body,  and  gradually  deprived  her  of  a 
working  episcopate,  in  time  extended  its  paralyzing 
influences  throughout  priesthood  and  laity.  Under  the 
frown  of  ministries  and  bishops  the  fervent  Cliurch- 
manship  of  the  preceding  period  withered  and  passed 
away.  We  find  it  surviving  in  old-fashioned  Tory 
households,  or  in  the  seclusion  of  country  parsonages, 
in  good  Bishop  Wilson's  insular  and  unremunerative 
see,  or  in  a  handful  of  obscure  guilds.  If  we  search 
for  it  in  high  places,  in  important  livings,  in  cathe- 
dral towns,  in  spheres  which  are  supj^osed  to  be  filled 
by  the  worthier  sons  of  the  Church,  we  search  in  vain. 
The  "  Establishment "  had  become  the  very  upas  tree  of 


462  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

CHAP.      Anglicanism.     Only  in  the  departments  of  controversy 
^vni^     and  party  politics  was  the  influence  of  the  Church  felt. 
The  It  is  in  view  of  this  condition  of  Christianity  that 

movement.  ^^®  Metliodist  movement  must  be  judged  to  be  rightly 
understood.  The  Methodist  sects  at  the  present  day 
are  religious  bodies  distinctly  severed  from  the  Church, 
albeit  not  regarding  her  with  the  rancour  of  the  political 
Dissenter.  Their  great  founder,  on  the  contrary,  lived 
and  died  a  Churchman.  Under  protest,  indeed,  and  to 
save  his  excellent  system  from  perishing  beneath  the 
paralyzing  influences  of  the  State  Church  connexion, 
he  committed  himself  to  acts  of  a  distinctly  schismatic 
character.  Persecuted  and  misunderstood,  he  allowed 
certain  of  his  followers  to  become  sectarians  until 
the  authorities  should  allow  them  to  be  Churchmen. 
The  Church  awoke  from  her  lassitude  to  find  that  the 
joim  rupture  was  irreparable.     John  Wesley  was  born  at 

Wesley.  Epworth  Ecctory  in  1703.  His  parents  were  loyal 
Anglicans,  and  opposed  to  the  Low  Church  dynasty. 
His  talents  To  remarkable  eloquence  and  extraordinary  energy 
and  tern-  j^^  Ecformcr  joined  a  capacity  for  administration  and 
organization  that  has  perhaps  never  been  equalled. 
These  great  gifts  were  marred  by  masterfulness,  im- 
pulsiveness, and  a  tendency  to  puerile  superstition, 
not  uncommon  among  good  men  of  his  day.  He  be- 
lieved in  dreams,  directed  his  movements  by  the  first 
text  in  an  opened  Bible,  and  discovered  miraculous 
interpositions  where  more  sober  Christians  saw  only 
the  orderly  system  of  Providence.  Always  a  devout 
person,  each  new  phase  of  his  religious  life  brought  him 
to  regard  the  period  preceding  as  one  in  which  he  knew 
not  God.  As  in  the  cases  of  Dr.  Johnson  and  Bishop 
Wilson,  the  seed  sown  in  a  pious  home  was  stimu- 
lated by  William  Law's  "  Serious  Call "  and  "  Christian 


THE   GEORGIAN  PERIOD.  463 

Perfection."  From  equally  unexceptionable  sources  came 
the  system  which  secured  for  the  Wesleys  and  their 
coterie  at  Oxford  the  name  of  Methodists.     Eeligious  2trS)u-^ 
o;uilds  of  more  or  less  austere  character  had  been  set  t^bieto 
on  foot  in  London  and  other  large  towns  by  Horneck,  catholic 

.  /»       1         -n  influences. 

Be  vend  ge,   and  others  about   the   time  or   the   Kevo- 
lutioD.      The   "Holy"    or    "Methodist"    Club   was   a  The  Oxford 
guild  whose  members  practised   a  life  of   great  self-  dists. 
denial,  and  were  frequent  communicants — a  feature  so 
strange   in   those   days   as  to  provoke  the  additional 
sobriquet,  "  Sacramentarians."    Wesley  was  ordained  in 
1725.     His   first   independent   enterprise    was    a   mis-  The 
sionary  expedition  to  Georgia  to  convert  the  Indians.  Georgia. 
Despite  his  self-denial  and  devotion,  this  mission  was 
a  failure,  and  he  contrived  to  make  enemies  with  the 
colonists  by  acts  of  sino;ular  indiscretion.     This  enter-  „ 

«^  r      .  .  Moravian 

prise  is  notable  as  bringing  Wesley  in  contact  with  influences, 
some  Moravian  missionaries,  whose  peculiar  opinions 
were  henceforth  to  be  a  powerful  agency  in  his  minis- 
terial work.  The  most  striking  features  in  their  scheme 
of  theology  were  the  doctrines  of  "  instantaneous  con- 
version" and  an  accompanying  "assurance"  of  sal- 
vation. On  Wesley's  return  to  England  he  made  the 
acquaintance  of  Peter  Bohler,  a  Moravian  minister, 
who  riveted  the  impression  made  by  the  missionaries. 
He  conceived  himself  to  be  "converted"  in  May,  1738. 

Meanwhile  a  somewhat  similar  experience  had  be-  oeorgp 
fallen  another  Oxford  Metliodist,  George  Whitefield. 
Far  inferior  to  Wesley  in  birth,  intellect,  and  culture, 
Whitefield  was  possessed  of  an  oratorical  talent  which 
afterwards  made  him  the  most  persuasive  preacher  Eng- 
land has  ever  produced.  His  taste  was  execrable  and 
his  mind  narrow,  but  his  sincerity  and  zeal  are  undeni- 
able.   His  pious  labours  in  Gloucester  gaol  had  induced 


Whitefield. 


464 


ECCLESIA    ANGLICANA. 


Sensa- 
tional 
sermons. 


Open-air 
preacihing- 


Bishop  Benson  to  ordaia  liim  at  tlie  early  age  of 
twenty-one.  Whitefield  learnt  from  the  French  re- 
fugees in  London  an  emotional  religion  akin  to  that  of 
the  Moravians.  But  he  added  what  Wesley's  superior 
intellect  always  spurned — those  Calvinistic  dogmas 
which  open  the  gates  of  merc}^  only  to  a  predestined 
few.  The  two  great  "Methodists"  soon  provoked  atten- 
tion and  antagonism  by  an  enthusiastic  style  of  preach- 
ing markedly  contrasting  with  that  in  vogue.  Some 
disgraceful  disturbances  ensued,  resulting  in  their 
exclusion  from  the  churches  of  their  brother  clergy. 
The  expedient  of  open-air  preaching  was  now  resorted 
to.  A  mission  was  begun  at  Kingswood,  near  Bristol, 
which  drew  enormous  congregations.  This  was  the 
precursor  of  an  evangelizing  scheme  carried  out  in 
every  part  of  these  islands,  and  extended  to  America. 
It  was  a  work  unlike  anything  since  the  mission  of  the 
Friars  in  the  thirteenth  century.  Thousands  whom 
the  emasculated  State  Church  system  had  neglected  or 
failed  to  influence  were  now  affected  by  the  zeal  of  the 
Methodists,  and  professed  to  have  realized  the  comfort 
of  the  Gospel. 

The  sincerity  of   this    profession  is  undeniable   in 
many,   perhaps  in  the  majority  of  cases.     The  flaws 
in    the    emotional    system    are,    however,    sufSciently 
obvious,  and  our  own  experience  of  American  revival- 
ism may  lead  us  to  credit  the  charge  that  self-deception 
Theciiurcii  largely  predominated.     It  is  plain  also  that  the  con- 
Method-      vulsions    which    Wesley   attributed    to    supernatural 
^'  agency  were  merely  marks  of  that  infectious  hysteria 

which  had  so  often  appeared  in  the  Middle  Ages  in  con- 
nexion with  sensational  preaching.  But  however  im- 
perfect the  system,  taunts  came  ill  from  those  who 
had  neglected  to  teach  the  lower  orders  a  better  way. 


THE  GEORGIAN  PERIOD.  465 

"  It  was  STirely  better  that  the  heathens  of  Kingswood  chap. 
should  be  thus  evangelized  than  not  be  evangelized  at  ^^L^ 
all."  The  Church  dignitaries,  however,  thought  other- 
wise. The  movement  was  regfarded  throug-hout  with 
indifference  or  ill-will.  Their  conduct  in  this  matter  The  Metiio- 
appears  the  more  shameful  when  we  reflect  that  the  chiircii- 
Blethodists  were  staunch  Churchmen,  wholly  averse  ™®^' 
to  schism.  The  Wesley s  were  far  more  devoted  to 
the  Anglican  system  than  the  majority  of  the  bench, 
and  as  free  from  heterodox  opinion.  The  worst  charge 
against  the  Methodist  preachers  was  that  their  deep 
faith  in  Divine  Providence  led  them  to  dogmatize 
unnecessarily  on  the  operations  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 
Their  doctrines  of  "  conversion  "  and  "  assurance  "  con- 
fined within  a  Procrustean  frame — narrow  as  that  of 
ultra-Eomanism — those  gracious  influences  which  the 
Saviour  Himself  depicted  as  free  as  the  winds  of 
heaven.^  But  numbers  of  Catholics  have  held  these 
doctrines,  and  overestimated  them  as  much  as  the 
Methodists  did.  A  schismatic  John  Wesley  was  not. 
Kone  better  appreciated  the  true  spirit  of  Puritan 
Dissent.  "  We  are  not  seceders,"  he  writes,  "  nor  do 
we  bear  any  resemblance  to  them.  The  seceders  laid 
the  foundation  of  their  work  in  judging  and  condemn- 
ing others.  We  ...  in  judging  and  condemning  our- 
selves. They  begin  everywhere  by  showing  how 
fallen  the  Church  and  ministers  are;  we  .  .  .  with 
showing  our  hearers  how  fallen  they  are  themselves." 

The  insubordinate  and  anti-sacramental  tendencies  course  of 
of    the   Moravians    soon    repelled    both    Wesley   and  ^^^t^o^e"" 
Whitefield    (1740).     In   the   following   year  the  Cal- "^®^*' 

'  In  later  years  Wesley  qualified  these  shibboleths.  "  When,  fifty  years  ago," 
he  writes,  "  my  brother  Charles  and  T  told  the  good  people  of  England  that  unless 
they  knew  their  sins  were  forgiven  they  were  under  the  curse  of  God,  I  mai-vel 
they  did  not  stone  us.    The  Methodists,  I  hope,  know  better  now." 

2    H 


466  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

CHAP,  vinism  of  Whitefield  was  found  to  necessitate  a  riip- 
«5Z^^  ture  between  the  two  friends.  A  reconciliation  took 
place  nine  years  later,  but  Methodism  continued  to 
flow  in  two  distinct  channels — the  Arminian  and  the 
Calvinistic  ;  the  one  directed  by  the  brothers  Wesle}^ 
the  other  by  Whitefield  and  the  Countess  of  Hunting- 
don. During  Wesley's  lifetime  one  section  at  least  of 
the  Methodists  was  kept  within  the  bounds  of  system  and 
discipline.  The  converts  of  the  different  regions  were 
grouped  in  "societies"  or  "circles."  These  were  sub- 
divided by  means  of  "  classes  "  and  "  bands."  All  this 
machinery   was    still    professedly   subsidiary    to    the 

A.D.  1744.  Church.  The  first  Wesleyan  Conference  proclaimed 
that  the  peculiar  tenets  of  Methodism  were  these ;  viz. 
that  justifying  faith  is  a  conviction  of  personal  sal- 
vation ;  that  no  person  can  be  justified  and  not  know 
it ;  that  inward  conviction  is  the  proof  of  faith.  This 
Conference  also  decided  that  bishops  and  Church 
canons  were  to  be  obeyed  as  far  as  possible.  But  the 
bishops  persistently  refused  their  sj'mpathy.  The 
clergy  were  encouraged  to  close  their  churches  against 
Methodist  missionaries  in  Holy  Orders.  Those  not 
ordained  sought  ordination  in  vain.  We  cannot 
wonder  that  in  1750  the  question  of  secession  from 
the  Church  was  mooted.  In  1755  the  Conference  took 
no  higher  ground  than  that  of  expediency^  in  prohibit- 
ing unordained  preachers  from  administering  the  Holy 
Communion.     In  1760  the  society  at  Norwich  infringed 

Thecal-      tliis   regulation.      In   the    year    1781    some   litigation 

vinistic 

Methodists  with  rcspcct  to  the  legal  status  of  Lady  Huntingdon's 
Eeives  ^^  chapels  compelled  the  Calvinistic  Methodists  to  register 
them  as  Dissenting  places  of  worship.  They  reluctantly 
called  themselves  "  seceders."  It  was  not  long  before 
they  cheerfully  owned  themselves  Dissenters. 


seceders. 


THE   GEORGIAN  PERIOD.  467 

The  pretext  for  the  Wesley  an  secession  was  afforded       chap. 

by  Wesley's  conduct  in  the  matter  of  the  American      v ^J^ 

consecrations.     Even    here,    if   we   condemn   Wesley's  Lesley's 

*^      mock  con- 
precipitation,  the  chief  blame  must  fall  on  the  national  secration. 

prelates.  For  upwards  of  a  century  the  colonists  in 
America  had  been  petitioning  the  mother  country  to 
send  out  bishops,  to  superintend  the  Transatlantic 
offshcTot  of  our  Church.  It  seems  scarcely  credible  that 
this  demand  was  considered  preposterous — that  its 
8upj)orters  were  assailed  by  statesmen,  and  even  by 
prelates  with  denunciation  and  rebuke.  Episcopacy 
might  be  tolerated,  but  that  a  distinctively  Catholic 
accessory  should  be  esteemed  and  extended  was  in- 
tolerable to  the  Georgian  Latitudinarians.  John 
Wesley  saw  that,  whatever  the  issue  of  this  struggle,^ 
it  would  be  hopeless  to  ask  that  Methodist  bishops 
should  be  consecrated  or  Methodist  pastors  ordained. 
Yet  must  his  American  societies  have  that  machinery 
for  supervision  which  has  never  been  wanting  in  any 
branch  of  the  Catholic  Church.  He  chose  what  he 
considered  the  less  of  two  evils,  and,  to  the  horror  of 
numerous  friends  and  followers,  himself  appointed  two 
English  clergymen  as  "  superintendents,"  and  two  •^•^- 1784. 
laymen  as  "  presbyters,"  by  laying  on  of  hands.  It  was 
a  precedent  which  boded  ill  for  the  future  of  Metho- 
dism. The  way  was  paved  for  secession  and  its  con- 
sequence, sectarian  dissidence.  Both  followed  directly 
the  master  mind  of  Methodism  ceased  to  exercise  con-  ^   , 

W^esley 

trol.     "In   God's   name,    stop   there.      Be    Church   of  dies  dep:  e- 
England   men   still.     Do  not  cast   away  the  peculiar  cession. 

^  It  is  remarkable  that  the  battle  was  practically  won  before  the  close  of  the 
year  which  witnessed  Wesley's  mock  consecration.  Dr.  Scabury  was  consecrated 
as  Bishop  of  Connecticut  by  the  Primus  of  Scotland  in  November,  1784.  In  1787 
all  difficulties  were  overcome  in  England,  and  two  more  bishops  were  consecrated 
by  Archbishop  Moore. 


468 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


CHAP. 
XVIII. 


But  his 

follo^w■ers 
split  into 
sects. 


The 

Evange 

lical 

revival. 

A.D.  1775- 

1820. 


Its  cha- 
racter. 


glory  wliicli  God  liatli  put  upon  you."  Such,  was  bis 
final  charge  on  the  subject  to  his  preachers.  But  he 
spoke  in  vain.  Four  years  after  his  death  the  "  Plan 
of  Pacification "  gave  the  preachers  authority  to  ad- 
minister the  Lord's  Supper  (1795).  Henceforth  the 
Church  had  to  regard  the  "people  called  Methodists" 
not  as  a  loyal  and  persecuted  ecclesiastical  guild,  but 
as  an  antagonistic  and  powerful  congeries  of  sects.-"^ 

A  happier  consequence  of  the  Methodist  movement, 
was  the  rise  of  the  "  Evangelical  "  school  within  the 
Church.  Its  members  were  pietists  of  the  Whitefield 
type.  They  held  a  lower  view  of  the  Church  than  Wes- 
ley, and  were  mostly  Calvinists.  It  was  not  always 
plain  why  they  belonged  to  the  Church  rather  than  to 
the  Methodist  sects.  They  ignored  the  objective  side 
of  religion  altogether,  were  weak  on  the  point  of  bap- 
tismal regeneration,  cared  nothing  for  the  decencies  of 
worship,  and  transferred  to  the  pulpit  the  dignity  of  the 
altar.  They  divided  their  hearers  into  two  classes,  "be- 
lievers "  and  "  unbelievers,"  and  holding  that  a  sudden 
conversion  was  essential  to  salvation,  preached  to  eifect 
it.  Luther's  doctrine  of  imputed  righteousness  was  the 
key-note  of  all  their  sermons,  which  were  of  fearful 
length,  and  varied  mainly  in  the  amount  of  Calvinism 
superadded.     They  inveighed  fiercely,  not  only  against 


'  The  following  details  are  taken  from  Mr.  Curteis's  Dissent  in  its  Relation  to  the 
Church  : — "  Two  years  later,  a  large  secession  took  place  (1797),  under  a  minister 
named  Kilham,  on  the  question  of  admitting  lay  representatives  to  the  annual 
Conference  ;  and  the  Methodist  New  Connexion  was  formed.  In  1810  the  question 
of  open-air  preaching  and  of  '  revivals  '  caused  another  schism,  and  the  Primitive 
Methodists  broke  away  from  the  parent  body.  In  1815  the  Bible  Christians 
seceded.  In  1835  a  quarrel  broke  out  on  the  proposal  to  establish  a  Theological 
College,  and  an  eminent  minister.  Dr.  Warren,  .  .  .  was  expelled."  His  supporters 
founded  the  Wesleyan  Methodist  Association.  In  connexion  with  the  same  cause 
the  Wesleyan  Methodist  Reformers  sprang  into  life  in  1849.  Other  branches  living 
and  dead  may  be  mentioned — all  boasting  the  High  Churchman  Wesley  as  their 
parent  stem. 


THE   GEORGIAN  PERIOD.  469 

tlie   stage   (at   that    time    hopelessly   degraded),    but      chap. 
against   many   innocent   diversions.     From   these   the     ^I^^L* 
converted  were  debarred.     With  this    exception,  they 
had  no  "  guidance  "  for  the  soul,  believing  that  sufficient 
was  to  be  found  in  St.  Paul's  Epistles.     They  dared  to 
stigmatize  practical  exhortations  as  "  not  the  Gospel." 

Even  this  bald,  mutilated  form  of  theology  was  a 
vast  improvement  on  the  lifeless  system  hitherto  pre- 
valent. Its  professors  were  pious,  hard-working  parish 
priests,  strict,  to  the  verge  of  prudery,  in  their  manner 
of  life,  yet  enthusiastic  and  sympathetic  on  the  one 
point  of  religion.  Under  the  influence  of  the  Metho- 
dist and  Evangelical  movements,  the  Church  here 
and  there  recovered  vitality.  There  was  a  reaction 
against  profligacy  and  scepticism.  Many  philanthropic 
schemes  were  successfully  carried  out.  But  it  was  ever 
the  inspiration  of  detached  units,  not  of  the  mass. 
For  corporate  action  the  Evangelical  system  ofiered  no 
scope.  It  was  a  purely  subjective  religion,  one  based 
on  feelings,  to  the  exclusion  of  creeds  and  means  of 
grace.  Its  view  of  the  Christian  gathering  was  funda- 
mentally at  variance  with  the  congregational  system 
of  our  Prayer-book,  and  it  attached  no  value  to  ac- 
cessories of  worship.  Naturally  the  services  continued 
as  slovenly,  and  the  fabrics  as  uncared  for,  as  during 
the  period  of  religious  apathy. 

For  the  Evangelical  as  for  the  Methodist  movement  its 
the    Church   was    indebted    to   the    priesthood.      The  Sln°th? 
episcopate  remained  averse  to  "  enthusiasm."     Bishop  JSSi^'^ 
Porteus  and  Dean  Milner  were  the  only  Evangelicals 
who  got  high  preferment  in  the  eighteenth  century. 
The  fathers  of  the  Evangelical  school  were  Fletcher  of 
Madeley,    Venn   of  Huddersfield,   Toplady   of  Broad- 
hembury,   Berridge   of    Everton,    Hervey   of   Wellyn, 


470  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

CHAP.     Eomaine  of  London,  Newton  of  Olney,  and  Eowland 

31^^^     Hill,  who  eventually  established  a  religion  of  his  own 

at  Surrey  Chapel.     Later  came  Cecil,  Conyers,  Scott, 

Venn    of  Clapham,  and   Simeon.     The   most  eminent 

Evangelicals   among  the   laity  were  William  Wilber- 

force,    Lord   Dartmouth,    Lord    Teignmouth,    the   two 

Thorntons,  and  Hannah  More. 

Its  institu-       Perhaps  the  most  valuable  result  of  the  Evangelical 

tionsvoid    revival  was  the  institution  of  Sunday  schools.     They 

of  system.  ''  .       *^ 

A.D,  1781.  were  first  introduced  at  Gloucester  by  Eobert  Eaikes, 
a  printer,  and  Mr.  Stock,  a  clergyman.  They  were 
soon  extended  in  every  direction.  The  distinctive 
teaching  of  the  Church  was  not  inculcated  in  these 
earlier  Sunday  schools.  A  similar  disregard  for  system 
is  noticeable  in  the  four  societies  which  owe  their 
birth  to  the  Evangelicals — the  Church  Missionary 
Society,  the  Eeligious  Tract  Society,  the  Bible  Society, 
and  the  British  and  Foreign  School  Society, 
^j^g  It  is  perhaps  a  proof  of  the  capacity  of  the  Angli- 

churchnot  ean  system  to   satisfy  minds  of   every  type,  that   the 

stimulated  *^  "^  i  i      i  t-w- 

bytiie  leading  Evangelicals  did  not  largely  lapse  to  Dissent,^ 
faj^ove-  nor  often  canvass  for  alterations  in  the  Prayer-book, 
ment.  j^   jg   certainly  impossible  to   believe  that   these    re- 

formers owed  much  to  the  Church.  There  was  truth 
in  the  apophthegm  of  a  famous  Dissenting  preacher 
who  described  them  as  would-be  Dissenters  who  had 
lost  their  way.  The  Church  system,  in  fact,  became 
more  and  more  vitiated  throughout  the  reign  of 
George  III.  The  literary  bishops  gave  place  to 
hangers-on  of  the  aristocracy.  Younger  sons  and  con- 
nexions of  peers,  or  private  tutors  in  the  families  of 

'  Their  converts  only  too  often  accepted  Antinomian  schemes  akin  to  those  of 
the  earlier  Puritans  :  Scott,  who  succeeded  the  celebrated  Newton  at  Olney,  found 
the  parish  brimful  of  Antinomians  and  Dissenters.  The  later  phase  of  the  Evan- 
gelical movement  was  especially  conducive  to  dissent. 


THE   GEORGIAN  PERIOD.  \li 

noblemen  and  statesmen,  filled  nineteen  out  of  twenty-  chap. 
six  bishoprics  in  tbe  year  1815.  The  episcopal  reve-  v — ^J^ 
nues  were  at  this  time  enormous,  yet  the  bishops  did  J^® 

•^  ^  bishops. 

not  blush  to  provide  for  their  own  by  bestowal  of 
canonries,  rectories,  etc.  When  not  engaged  in  affairs 
of  state,  they  commonly  spent  all  their  hours  in 
lettered  ease.  Such  episcopal  duties  as  confirmation, 
and  examining  for  orders  and  conferring  orders,  were 
neglected,  or  performed  in  a  slovenly,  perfunctory 
fashion.  The  clergy  were  also  often  non-resident,  but 
with  more  excuse.  The  clerical  status  had  altered,  The  clergy, 
but  nothing  had  been  done  to  provide  residences  fit  for 
persons  who  now  ranked  as  gentlemen.  In  numberless 
parishes  a  ruinous  cottage  betokened  the  site  of  the 
ancient  parsonage,  and  there  was  no  means  of  securing 
a  better  accommodation.  Livings  were  therefore  amal- 
gamated. Not  unfrequently  two  or  more  churches 
were  served  on  Sunday  from  the  nearest  town,^  and  this 
was  all  the  parishes  saw  of  their  incumbent.  Fifteen 
churches  in  the  Norwich  diocese  were  served  by  three 
brothers  as  recently  as  1837.  "Hannah  More  speaks 
of  thirteen  contiguous  parishes  without  even  a  resident 
curate.  A  clergyman  of  the  diocese  of  Norwich  wrote  : 
'  When  first  I  came  here  in  1837,  out  of  twenty-eight 
parishes,  five  churches  only  were  open  for  divine  ser- 
vice twice  on  the  Lord's  Day.' "  ^  The  state  of  the  The 
fabrics  defies  description.  Church  restoration  was  not  ^^"^*^^®^' 
thought  of.  It  was  rarely  that  new  churches  were 
built  to  meet  the  wants  of  the  increasing  population.^ 

'  This  appears  to  have  been  almost  invariably  the  case  with  the  parishes  round 
the  university  towns.  There  are  few  country  parsonages  within  seven  miles  of 
Cambridge  that  are  more  than  forty  years  old. 

-  See  Hore's  Eighteen  Centuries  of  the  Church  of  England,  p.  545  and  seq. 

^  Bishop  Porteus,  an  Evangelical,  held  the  see  of  London  from  1787  to  1808. 
During  that  time  not  one  church  was  built  in  London.  Bishop  Blomfleld  during 
the  years  1828-1856  consecrated  nearly  two  hundred. 


472  ECCLESIA  ANGLICANA, 

CHAP.  The  Holy  Communion  was  administered  yearly  to  a  few 
^Zifil'  aged  persons.  The  young  generation  grew  up  utterly 
ignorant  of  Churcli  doctrine.  Mr.  Gladstone  in  1874 
thus  describes  the  condition  of  our  English  churches 
"  fifty  and  forty  years  ago,"  i.e.  after  a  full  half  cen- 
tury of  the  Evangelical  system :  "  The  actual  state 
of  things  as  to  worship  was  bad  beyond  all  parallel 
known  to  me  in  experience  or  reading.  Taking  to- 
gether the  expulsion  of  the  poor  and  labouring  classes 
(especially  from  the  town  churches),  the  mutilation  and 
blockages  of  the  fabrics,  the  baldness  of  the  service, 
the  elaborate  horrors  of  the  so-called  music  .  .  .  and, 
above  all,  the  coldness  and  indifference  of  the  lounging 
and  sleeping  congregation,  our  services  were  probably 
without  a  parallel  in  the  world  for  their  debasement ; 
and  as  they  would  have  shocked  a  Brahmin  or  a 
Buddhist,  so  they  hardly  could  have  been  endured  in 
this  country  had  not  the  faculty  of  taste  and  the  per- 
ception of  the  seemly  or  unseemly  been  as  dead  as  the 
spirit  of  devotion."  ^ 

'  "  Ritual  and  Ritualism,"  Contemporary  Review,  October,  1874. 


THE   CHURCH  OF  THE  PRESENT  DA  Y.    473 


CHAPTER  XIX. 
Z^t  ©l^ucci)  of  ti)c  ^rc^cnt  Sag. 

A.D.  1820-1881. 

Evangelical  zeal  fused  with  the  Church's  system — The  Tractarians — The  revival 
begins  at  Oxford — And  spreads  throughout  the  country — Resentment  of  the  domi- 
nant factions — The  "  Surplice  Riot  "—Secessions  to  Rome — Encouraged  by  the 
Gorham  Judgment — Yet  the  Latitudinarians  lose  ground — And  the  Evangelicals 
have  to  go  with  the  tide  of  Anglicanism — Convocation  allowed  to  deliberate — 
The  colonial  episcopate  extended — New  English  bishoprics — Sunday  schools 
subsidiary  to  the  Church's  system — Church  seats  made  free — Other  beneficial 
results — League  of  unbelievers  and  political  Dissenters. — Anomalies  in  the  State 
connexion — Spoliation  and  encroachments — Prospect  of  disestablishment — Per- 
secution in  matters  of  ritual — The  Privy  Council  Committee  made  Supreme 
Court  of  Appeal — This  arrangement  at  variance  with  the  Reformation  settle- 
ment— Rise  of  the  "  Ritualists  " — The  Puritans  harass  ritualistic  clergymen  in 
the  new  court — Questionable  decisions — The  "  Public  Worship  Regulation  Act " — 
Three  aggrieved  parishioners — The  new  tribunal  not  acknowledged — Present 
results  of  the  contest — Decisions  of  the  Privy  Council  Committee. 

The   period  of  ecclesiastical  stagnation   coincides  ap-  Evang-e- 
proximately  with  the  era  of  the  four  Georges.     The  fussed  with 
teaching  of  such  men  as  Cecil  and  Simeon  had  doubt-  ch^urcii's 
less  done  much  to  promote  "  seriousness,"  and  to  enlist  ®y^*®°^- 
the  sympathies  of  earnest  men  in   the  cause  of  phi- 
lanthropy.   But  the  Evangelical  system  was  at  best  an 
exaggeration  of  one  part  of  the  Catholic  scheme.     One- 
sided and  narrow,  it  was  capable  of  producing  a  limited 
number  of  ascetics  and  devotees,  but  utterly  unable  to 
leaven  society.    Evangelical  zeal  had  to  be  diverted  into 


riaus. 


474  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

CHAP. 

XIX.  other  channels  ere  the  Church  could  be  roused  from  her 
^j^g  ^  lethargy.  This  diversion  was  effected  by  the  "  Trac- 
^.^acta-  tarian"  movement,  a  revival  which  has  been  well  de- 
scribed as  "  not  antagonistic  but  supplemental "  to  its 
precursor,  "  holding  quite  as  strongly  the  necessity  of 
conversion,  justification  by  faith,  and  the  supremacy 
of  the  Scriptures ;  but  also  bringing  into  prominence 
those  doctrines  which  the  Evangelicals  had  under- 
valued— the  doctrine  of  the  sacraments,  of  faith  show- 
ing itself  by  works,  of  Church  authority,  and  the 
Apostolical  succession."^     The  first  sign  of  this  great 


A.D.  1827. 


Therevivai  revival  was  the  publication  of  Keble's  "  Christian 
Oxford.  Year."  The  extraordinary  influence  of  this  book — now 
probably  the  most  widely  read  of  all  devotional  works 
■ — was  fitly  augured  by  the  rage  it  excited  in  Low 
Church  and  Latitudinarian  circles.  It  was  not  long 
before  the  "  Christian  Year "  was  publicly  burnt  at 
Oxford.  Six  years  later  came  Keble's  celebrated 
A.D.  1833.  gerjjQQjj  Qji  u  J^ational  Apostacy,"  immediately  followed 
by  the  first  meeting  of  the  Oxford  "  Tractarians." 
The  two  special  objects  which  these  great  reformers 
set  before  them  were  the  maintenance  and  assertion  of 
Catholic  doctrine,  especially  the  doctrine  of  the  Apos- 
tolical succession,  and  the  preservation  of  the  Praj^er- 
book  in  its  integrity.  The  leading  names  were  Keble, 
Newman,  Percival,  William  Palmer,  Isaac  Williams, 
Hurrell  Froude,  and  (after  1836)  Dr.  Pusey.  The 
*'  Tracts  for  the  Times  "  made  their  first  appearan<3e 
in  1883.  The  series  was  closed  in  1841,  with  N^ew- 
man's  celebrated  No.  90.  Meanwhile  the  sister  uni- 
A.D.  1838.  versity  had  caught  the  inspiration,  and  given  birth 
^'^^  to  the  Camden  Society.     A  stranore  vitality  was  soon 

spreads  -^  o  ./ 

'  Eighteen  Centuries  of  the  Church  of  England,  p.  551.    To  this  excellent  work 
we  are  indebted  for  several  details  in  this  Chapter. 


THE   CHURCH  OF  THE  PRESENT  DAY.  475 

discernible  in  the  long-neglected  parishes.  The  doc-  chap. 
trinal  and  practical  teaching  of  the  Prayer-book  was  v-^^J-^ 
a^"ain   tau2;ht   from  the  pnlnit ;    the  sacraments  were  tiiroug-iiout 

.  .     .  .  the 

*'  rightly  and  duly  administered ;  "  services  were  cele-  country, 
brated  on  saint's  days,  and  even  daily ;  new  churches 
rose  to  meet  the  requirements  of  the  increasing  town 
population  ;  parsonages  were  built  in  the  country 
parishes  ;  the  ancient  fabrics  were  purged,  restored,  and 
beautified  ;  music  was  again  made  the  handmaid  of 
devotion ;  every  accessory  of  worship  was  once  more 
instinct  with  life  and  meaning.  Above  all,  "  to  the 
poor  the  Gospel  was  preached,"  and  no  longer  in  the 
stereotype  of  Evangelicism.  Every  year  Anglicanism 
became  a  stronger  religious  force,  winning  over  Evan- 
gelicals and  Dissenters,  opening  wide  the  purses  of  the 
rich,  hallowing  the  daily  toil  of  the  busy,  cheering 
the  life  of  the  suffering  and  indigent.  The  Low 
Church  svstem  was   manifestly  doomed.     But  it  did  Resent- 

.      T .        "   .   T         .  ,  T       •  T  ment  of  the 

not   die   without   a   struggle.     It   is   not   pleasant    to  dominant 
record  that  the  restoration  of  life  to  the  dry  bones  of 
the  Establishment  was  resented  not  only  by  Dissenters 
and  indiflferentists,  but  also  by  many  Evangelicals.     If 
to  the  former  it  was  a  defiance,  to  the  latter  it  was  a 
reproach.     Warm  controversies  and  disgraceful  agita- 
tions ensued.     A  striking  and   instructive  instance  of  The 
senseless   Puritanical   furore  was  the  (now  forgotten)  mJi^  ^^^ 
"  Surplice  Eiot."  ^     For  a  time  the  issue  was  doubtful.  ^'^  ^®^^' 

*  The  happiest  omen  for  the  perf5ecuted  Anglicanism  of  the  present  day  is  to  be 
found  in  the  complacent  and  almost  universal  acceptance  now  of  the  ritual  as- 
sailed forty  years  ago.  Mr.  Gladstone  records  the  instructive  case  of  a  devoted 
clergyman  who  was  persecuted  out  of  his  benefice  "  for  the  offence  of  having 
preached  the  morning  sermon  in  the  surplice,  read  the  Prayer  for  the  Church 
Militant,  and  opened  his  church  for  divine  service,  not  daily,  but  on  all  festivals." 
He  wisely  remarks  that  the  inference  to  be  drawn  from  this  change  of  feeling  is 
"not  an  inference  of  self-laudation  .  .  .  but  an  inference  in  behalf  of  a  little 
self-mistrust."    Other  and  equally  Important  lessons  are  to  be  learnt  from  the 


476 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


CHAP. 
XIX. 


Secessions 
to  Rome. 


En- 
couraged 
by  the 
Gorham 
judgment. 


A.D.  1865. 


Yet  the 

liatitudi- 

narians 

lose 

ground. 


The  Church  dignitaries  long  treated  the  Anglican,  as 
they  had  treated  the  Methodist  movement,  with  in- 
difference, suspicion,  or  open  hostility.  Not  until  the 
second  order  of  clergy  had  won  the  attention  of  a  large 
section  of  the  upper  classes  did  the  bishops  find  a  good 
word  for  it.  Meanwhile  Newman  had  been  harassed 
out  of  the  Anglican  fold.  In  March,  1850,  the  Privy 
Council  Committee  made  its  appearance  as  a  theological 
faculty,  and  the  country  was  startled  by  the  Gorham 
Judgment.  The  true  value  of  such  sentences  was  not 
at  that  time  appreciated.  A  section  of  the  Oxford 
party  argued  that  the  Church  was  hopelessly  com- 
mitted to  Erastianism.  The  secession  of  Manning, 
Dodsworth,  the  two  Wilberforces,  and  Allies  followed. 
These  disasters  gave  a  plausible  a23pearance  to  the 
"  No  Popery "  cry  of  the  opponent  faction,  although 
almost  all  the  seceders  had  begun  life  as  Evan- 
gelicals. The  sanction  given  to  denial  of  baptismal 
grace  was  followed  by  the  exculpation  of  the  contri- 
butors to  "  Essays  and  Reviews,"  and  the  reinstatement 
of  Bishop  Colenso.  In  both  cases  judgments  of  bishops 
and  Convocations,  and  the  opinions  of  the  clerical  body 
at  large,  were  overridden  or  disregarded. 

It  was  expected  that  these  triumphs  of  Erastianism 
would  sap  the  very  foundations  of  Anglicanism. 
Really  they  have  rather  helped  the  Church's  cause  by 
rousing  men's  minds  to  the  meaning  and  value  of 
Catholic  dogma.  It  is  recognized  that  the  Church's 
formularies  are  only  impugned  because  not  speaking 
with  Act  of  Parliament  precision,  and  that  (out  of  law 
courts)  the  interpretation  which  is  at  variance  with 
common  sense  is  also  dishonest.     This  silent  influence 


reproduction  in  modern  Congregational  chapels  of  Gothic  architecture,  stained 
■windows,  organs,  and  surpliced  choirs,  if  we  bear  in  mind  that  the  fathers  of  the 
sect  discovered  in  such  accessories  of  worship  a  pretext  for  leaving  the  Church. 


THE  CHURCH  OF  THE  PRESENT  DA  V.  477 

of  public  opinion  and  their  own  inherent  lack  of  pro-       chap. 
feelytizing   zeal  has  prevented  the  Latitudinarian  doc-     ^.^^ 
trinaires  from  doing  appreciable   mischief  within  the 
Church's  pales.     If  the  Broad  Church  party  was  power- 
less to  arrest  the  Anglican  revival,  much  more  so  was  And  the 
the  Evangelical.    One  by  one  the  practices  and  the  doc-  ncaishave 
trines  formerly  stigmatized  as  "  Puseyite  "  have  been  Jjf  °i^^of 
accepted  by  the  clerical  disciples  of  Simeon,  sometimes  Angiican- 
spontaneously,  sometimes  at  the  instance  of  their  con- 
gregations.    It  is  hard  to  say  where  we  should  now  find 
an  Evangelical  service  of  the   old  type.     In  view  of 
fundamental  principles,  the  Anglican,  the  Evangelical, 
and  the  Broad-Churchman  must  always  remain  slightly 
dissevered   as   types  of  three  distinct  casts    of  mind. 
But  each  now  wisely  recognizes  that  the  other  has  his 
sphere  of  work,  and  that  the  Church  is  wide  enough 
for  all.    In  so  speaking  we  of  course  except  the  few  un- 
happy bigots — Puritans  of  the  seventeenth-century  type 
rather  than  Evangelicals — who  have  joined  with  the 
Church's  foes  to  persecute  what  they  call  "  Eitualism." 

Our  readers  must  be  contented  with  a  very  terse  and  convoca- 

.    .  .  tion 

jejune  summary  of  the  great  results  which  attended  auowedto 
the   revival   of    Anglicanism.      First    we    notice    the  a.d.  i85i,* 
reinstatement  of  Convocation  as  the  Church's  delibera- 
tive  body.     Much   opposition   was    encountered   from 
prelates  as  well  as  lay  statesmen  ere  Convocation  was  a.d.  issi- 
allowed  to  meet  according  to  ancient  usage.     Step  by 
step  it  has  since  won  its  way  to  a  status  which  bodes 
well   for   the   future.      It   has   already   acted   in   the 
matters   of    the    new   Lectionary   and   the   shortened 
services.     Keorganized  so  as  to   ensure   a   fair    repre- 
sentation  of  the   parochial   clergy,    it   will   doubtless 
one  day  be  summoned  to  act  as  the  Church's  Parlia- 
ment.     The   representative   principle   will,  we   hope, 


478 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


The 

colonial 

episcopate 

extended. 

Ne-w 

English 

bishoprics. 


Sunday- 
schools 
subsidiary 
to  the 
Church's 
system. 


Church 

seats' 
made  free. 


Other 

beneficial 

results. 


then  be  further  deveh:>ped  in  the  form  of  true  synods, 
limiting  episcopal  autocracy  in  the  dioceses,  in  accord- 
ance with  the  intentions  of  the  sixteenth-century 
reformers.  The  extension  of  the  colonial  episcopate 
is  another  valuable  result.  Prior  to  1825  there  were 
only  five  colonial  bishoprics  :  they  now  number  sixty- 
one.  Six  additions  to  the  home  bishoprics  have  been 
sanctioned  quite  recently — S.  Alban's,  Truro,  Liver- 
pool, Newcastle,  Southwell,  and  Wakefield.  Many 
more  ought,  of  course,  to  be  made,  but  the  Church  is 
hampered  in  this  matter  by  her  connexion  with  the 
State.  The  institution  of  the  annual  Church  Congress 
has  proved  a  happy  expedient  for  bringing  men  of  all 
parties  together  with  a  view  to  temperate  discussion. 
Every  year  its  sessions  excite  a  deeper  interest.  Our 
Sunday  school  organization,  though  not  originating  with 
the  Tractarian  movement,  like  every  other  department 
of  Church  work,  received  from  it  a  mighty  impulse, 
affecting  the  quality  of  the  teaching  as  well  as  the 
quantity  of  the  scholars.  In  former  days  every  strange 
type  of  Nonconformist  doctrine  struck  root  in  the 
intellects  of  the  lower  classes  as  on  virgin  soil.  The 
Anglicans  have  counteracted  this  popular  ignorance  as 
much  by  the  substitution  of  Church  doctrine  for  vague 
generalization  in  the  Sunday  school,  as  by  the  throw- 
ing open  of  churches  to  rich  and  poor  alike.  Nowhere 
have  they  laboured  more  successfully  than  among  the 
working  classes  of  our  towns.  For  the  recovery  of 
the  lower-middle  class,  which  formerly  hovered  between 
a  very  unpractical  Evangelicism  and  Dissent,  Canon 
Woodard's  magnificent  scholastic  scheme  is  in  opera- 
tion. Guilds,  sisterhoods,  colleges,  choral  associations, 
and  numberless  other  institutions  in  connection  with 


THE   CHURCH  OF  THE  PRESENT  DA  V.  479 

religion,  philanthropy,  and  culture,  have  sown  them-      chap. 

selves  in  every  part  of  the  land.     The  money  spent     > ^1^ 

on  church,   building   and   restoration  alone  amounted 
for  a  considerable  period  to  nearly  £1,000,000  a  year. 

We  turn  now  to  the  less  sunny  side  of  the  Church's 
fortunes.  If  her  influence  has  seldom  been  so  deeply 
felt,  hardly  ever  has  it  been  so  bitterly  opposed  as  in 
this  generation.  The  Deism  of  the  eighteenth  century 
finds  its  counterpart  now,  outside  the  Church,  in  a 
degrading  materialism,  advocated  by  men  of  the  highest 
intellectual  calibre.     The  pious  Nonconformist,  the  i3re-  i^eagne  of 

•••  _  ^  unbe- 

text  for  whose  Dissent  was  often  the  indolence  or  the  iievers  and 
incapacity  of  the  incumbent,  has  given  place  to  the  Dissenters. 
"  political  Dissenter,"  linked  in  unholy  alliance  with 
those  who  repudiate  Christianity  altogether.  The 
object  of  their  attack  is  the  time-honoured  alliance 
of  Church  and  State.  That  this  alliance  presents  in 
many  ways  an  anomalous  aspect  in  view  of  modern 
constitutional  changes  is  plain  enough.  The  grievance 
however,  is  not  the  non-Churchman's,  but  the  Church- 
man's.    The  admission  of  Dissenters,  Eomanists,  Jews,  ■^?™!;l^®f 

'  .         J  7  mtlie  state 

Deists,  etc.,  to  full  rights  of  citizenship  has  been  connexion, 
ceded.i  But  no  proviso  was  added  protecting  the 
Church's  interests.  The  Prime  Minister  now  has  the 
appointment  of  our  bishops  and  deans.  He  may 
be  a  Dissenter,  and  need  not  be  a  Christian.  The 
House  of  Commons,  again,  now  represents  Ireland  and 
Scotland  as  well  as  England.  It  must  contain  a 
quantity,  and  often  a  majority,  of  men  alien  to  our  ■ 
national  communion.  Yet  it  is  to  the  Commons  the 
Church  must  apply  before  she  can  even  increase  the 
number  of  her  bishops.     Anomalies  of  this  kind  affect 

'  The  disabilities  of  Dissenters  were  removed  in  1828,  those  of  Romanists  in 
1829,  those  of  Jews  in  1858. 


48o  ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 

all  the  mutual   relations  of  Churcli  and   State.     The 
instance  most  familiar,  perhaps,  to  the  country  clergy- 
is  the  continued  interference  of  Dissenters  at  meetings 
for  election  of  churchwardens,  while  claiming  absolute 
exemption  from  all  charges  for  the  maintenance  of  the 
Church's  fabrics  or  services. 
Spoliation       ^J  ^^^  ^i^  of  fraudulent  statistics,^  however,  the  sects 
croach-       have  represented   themselves   as   all   but   a   majority, 
ment.  g^g  downtroddcu  by  reason  of  their  social  status,  and  as 

groaning  under  the  hardship  of  exclusion  from  "  State 
endowments."  In  the  Commons,  as  now  constituted, 
this  form  of  misrepresentation  will  of  necessity  often 
find  favour.  Admission  to  such  Church  benefices 
as  lay  fellowships  at  the  universities  was  ceded  in 
1871,  and  a  sweeping  diversion  of  those  intended  for 
men  in  orders  is  impending.  The  sanction  of  all  kinds 
of  "Christian"  ministration  in  the  churchyard  (time 
Prospect  of  out  of  mind  the  parson's  freehold)  was  secured  by 
SSrmSt.  t^e  Burial  Laws  Amendment  Act  of  1880.  Disestab- 
lishment and  disendowment  may  at  this  rate  soon  be 
brought  within  range  of  vision.  The  Irish  Church 
has  already  experienced  this  fate.  Neither  the  pretext 
nor  the  result  can  be  at  all  similar  in  this  country,  but 
it  is  an  issue  for  which  faithful  Anglicans  will  do  well 
to  prepare.  That  it  would  for  a  time  terribly  impair 
the  religious  life  of  England,  especially  that  of  country 
districts,  is  certain.  On  the  other  hand,  it  would  probably 
free  the  Church  from  "  perils  among  false  brethren," 

^  The  disgraceful  frauds  by  which  the  religious  census  of  1851  was  made 
to  produce  a  result  of  forty-eight  non-Anglicans  per  cent,  have  been  sufiBciently 
exposed.  Churchmen  have  since  repeatedly  appealed  for  a  genuine  religious 
census,  but  the  Dissenters  have  thought  fit  to  decline  the  challenge.  It  is 
computed  in  Raveusheim's  Denomination  Statistics  that  "the  proportion  of  Dis- 
senters of  all  kinds,  Jews,  Eoman  Catholics,  and  Secularists,  amounts  to  twenty- 
two  per  cent,  of  the  population  of  England  and  Wales."  The  figure  is  raised  to 
about  twenty-seven,  if  we  judge  only  by  army,  school,  and  workhouse  returns. 


THE  CHURCH  OF  THE  PRESENT  DAY.  481 
give  her  an  episcopate  more  at  one  with  the  parochial      chap. 


XIX. 


clergy,  ensure  her  the  blessing  of  self-government,  and 
abolish  numerous  anomalies  which  now  impair  her 
vitality  and  cripple  her  powers  of  action. 

Probably  nothing  has  so  much  tended  to  depreciate  Persecu- 
the  value  of  the  State  connexion  as  the  episode  of  the  matters  of 
Ritual  prosecutions,  with  a  brief  account  of  which  we 
close  this  history  of  our  Church's  fortunes.    The  subject 
involves  a  fuller  account  of  the  tribunal  alluded  to  in 
connexion  with  the  Gorham  Judgment.     In  1832  the 
old  Court  of  Delegates  was  abolished.     It  was  intended  ThePrivy 
to  leave  ecclesiastical  causes  in  the  hands  of  the  whole  comSittee 
Privy  Council,  as  including;  lords  spiritual  as  well  as  ^^^^  ^ 

•^  ox  Supreme 

temporal.     But  an  Act  of  1833,  bearino;  on  tlie  readiust-  court  of 

^  .  .  ^  "^  Appeal. 

ment  of  admiralty  and  colonial  appeals,  was,  by  a 
draughtsman's  blunder,  made  to  include  ecclesiastical 
as  well  as  other  causes.  These  were  thus  accidentally 
transferred  to  the  Judicial  Committee  of  the  Privy 
Council,  a  quorum  of  laymen,  all  of  whom  but  two 
might  be  Dissenters.  The  scandal  was  met  by  some 
provision  for  the  presence  of  bishops  at  the  hearing  of 
cases,  and  this  presence  was  "  unduly  embellished  with 
the  name  of  assessorship."  ^  The  constitution  of  the 
court  provoked  much  attention  at  the  time  of  the  Gor- 
ham case.  It  was  denounced  by  many  statesmen,  and  t^is 
the  present  Prime  Minister  regarded  it  as  "  an  injurious  men?fr 
and  even  dan&'erous  departure   from  the  Eeformation  "^^^'^^^^e 

'-'  ■'  ■with  the 

settlement."  -     But  none  foresaw  the  full  extent  of  the  i^eforma- 
peril.     Only  four  cases  of  doctrine  or  discipline  had  ment. 
been   brought   before   the  Court  of  Delegates  in   the 
period  1690-1832,  though  that  period  comprised  a  cen- 
tury full  of  heterodoxy  and  clerical  malpractice.     It 


'  Gladstone,  The  Royal  Supremacy,  1850. 
*  See  ibid.,  Preface  to  third  edition,  1877. 


2  I 


482  ECCLESIA    ANGLICANA. 

CHAP,     might  well  have  been  expected  that  the  offices  of  the 


XIX. 


new  court  would  be  seldom  required.  The  operation 
of  the  new  machinery  was,  however,  only  too  truly 
augured  by  the  Goiham  Judgment.  Meanwhile  Trac- 
tarianism  was  developing  what  is  vulgarly  called 
Rise  of  the  "  Eitualism."  Direct  appeal  to  the  soul  was  seconded 
ists."  by   an  elaborate  system   of  accessories,    affecting   the 

religious  instincts  through  the  medium  of  the  senses. 
The  influence  of  such  a  system  will  necessarily  depend 
largely  on  the  physical  and  mental  organization  of 
the  individual  worshipper,  and  on  the  degree  of  culture 
attained  or  attainable.  Its  limits  must  ever  be  to  a 
large  degree  a  question  first  of  discretion,  then  of 
good  taste.  The  "  Eitualists "  proceeded  cautiously, 
training  men's  minds  to  the  significance  of  the  objec- 
tive side  of  worship,  especially  in  the  Eucharist  service. 
Usually  no  new  ritual  was  introduced  till  it  com- 
mended itself  to  a  majority  of  the  communicants. 
The  result  was  that  their  churches  were  attended  by 
The  crowds    of  earnest    and    reverent    worshippers.      The 

h^asT^      factious  Puritanism  which  had  inspired  the  "  Surplice 
Ritualistic  Eiots "    soon    vcutcd   its   splccn  on   the   "  Ritualistic " 

clergsonen  . 

in  the  new  congregations,  and  the  anomalous  condition  of  the  ecclesi- 
astical tribunal  offered  a  good  opportunity  for  harassing 
litigation.  Once  only  was  the  true  point  at  issue,  the 
real  Presence  in  the  Sacrament,  directly  attacked.  The 
verdict  given  grudgingly  acquitted  the  very  highest 
form  of  sacramental  t<  aching.  It  might  reasonably  be 
urged  that,  if  a  doctrine  is  unimpeachable,  its  embodi- 
ment in  the  form  of  ritual  must  be  left  to  the  discretion 
of  the  minister  and  congregation.  The  Puritans,  how- 
ever, sunk  the  main  issue  and  wreaked  their  resentment 
on  external  minutiae.  Technical  knowledge  on  such 
points  was  hardly  to  be  expected  in  the  modern  High 


THE  CHURCH  OF  THE  PRESENT  DAY.  483 

Court  of  Appeal,  and  the  subject  had  not  at  that  time      chap, 
been  fully  investigated.     Several  decisions  were  gained      > — ^ 
adverse   to   the    Eitualists,    but    adverse   also   to   the  Question- 
opinions  of  high  legal  authorities,^  which  opinions  have  decisions, 
received  substantial  confirmation  from  the  subsequent 
researches  of  antiquarians  and  experts.     Hence  a  fresh 
cause  of   dissatisfaction.     It  was  felt  that   the  court 
was  not  only  illegitimate  by  origin,  but  was  also  unable 
to  give  the   points   at   issue  full  and   impartial   con- 
sideration.- 

The  climax  came  in  1874.     The  Puritans,  by  the  aid  The 

P  .  p     1  .  "Public 

01  certain  01  the  episcopate,  secured  a  "  Public  Wor-  worship 
ship   Eegulation   Act,"    transferring  the  work   of  the  Act." 
Privy  Council  Committee  to  a  lay  judge,  who  was  also 
to  combine   the  functions  of  the  Dean  of  Arches  and 
the  Auditor  of  the  Chancery  Court  of  York.     The  bill 
was    passed    in    defiance    of  Convocation,   and   fairly 
crowned  the  injustices  of  the  past  forty  years.     The 
Premier   ingenuously  confessed    that   it    was   an   Act 
for  "  putting   down  Eitualism,"    meaning     excess    of 
ritual.^     In  unconscious  imitation  of  the  anti-Church 
procedure  of   16-il,  the  Act   placed   every  Eitualistic 
clergyman  at  the  mercy  of  the  malice  or  ignorance  of  Three 
three  "  aggrieved  parishioners."     This  fraction  of  the  parish-  ^ 
congregation  was  empowered  to  hale  its  pastor  before  ^°'^®^^- 
the  lay  judge    for  excess   of   ritual,   the    limits  being 
measured  by  the  recent  questionable  decisions  of  the 

^  Notably  in  the  case  of  the  Ridsdale  Judgment,  which  Sir  Fitzroy  Kelly  did  not 
hesitate  to  denounce  as  containing  "much  of  policy  rather  than  of  law,  though 
perhaps  unconsciously  to  themselves  In  the  majority  of  judges." 

^  Mr.  Gladstone  urges  "  the  primary  importance  "  of  such  proceedings  not 
"  giving  rise  to  judgments  which  are  founded  (however  unconsciously)  on  motives 
of  policy  more  than  on  a  dry,  unbiased  consideration  of  the  law,  and  which  thereby 
suffer  loss  in  their  moral  claim  to  respect." — Royal  Supremacy,  Preface,  1877. 

^  As  every  one  who  kneels  in  prayer  is  a  Ritualist,  and  nearly  every  rubric  of 
the  Prayer-book  is  a  piece  of  Ritualism,  it  may  be  asked,  why  should  excess  be 
punishable  by  Act  of  Parliament  rather  than  defect  ? 


484 


ECCLESIA   ANGLICANA. 


CHAP. 
XIX. 


The  new 
tribunal 
not  ac- 
kno^v- 
ledged. 


Present 
result  of 
the  contest. 


Decisions 
of  the 
Privy 
Council 
Committee, 


Privy  Council.  The  three  need  not  be  communicants, 
may  be  men  of  bad  character,  and  certainly  in  all  past 
cases  have  in  no  way  represented  the  feelings  of  the 
congregation.  A  Puritan  Association  with  a  capital  of 
£50.000  at  once  set  to  work  to  find  three  men  of  straw 
in  the  parishes  where  high  ritual  prevailed.  The 
Anglicans,  on  the  other  hand,  decided  that  the  limits  of 
obedience  to  the  powers  that  be  would  be  overstepped 
by  submission  to  the  new  tribunal.  The  English 
Church  Union  and  the  Church  of  England  Working 
Men's  Society  pledged  themselves  to  the  supj^ort  of 
such  clergymen  as  have  introduced  high  ritual  with 
the  consent  of  their  congregations.  The  contest  is  still 
impending.  Hitherto  its  effect  has  been  to  show 
Puritanism  in  the  darkest  colours,  and  vastly  augment 
the  popularity  of  the  Eitualists,  four  of  whom  have 
preferred  imprisonment  to  sacrifice  of  principle.  But 
above  all,  it  has  induced  a  conviction  that  a  large  and 
active  body  such  as  the  Anglican  Church  can  no  longer 
be  fettered  by  the  caprices  of  aliens  or  indifferentists, 
but  must  at  all  hazards  recover  those  rights  of  self- 
government  which  are  now  claimed  by  all  other  insti- 
tutions, and  which  were  hers  before  they  were  theirs, 
and  are  theirs  because  they  were  hers. 

We  append  a  brief  summary  of  the  most  noted  de- 
cisions of  the  Privy  Council  Committee. 

Oorliam  v.  Bisliop  of  Exeter,  1850.  Euled  that  ''he  doctrine 
of  baptismal  regeneration  might  he  openly  denied  by  a 
clergyman. 

Liddell  v.  Westerton  and  Liddell  v.  Beal,  1857.  Euled  that 
an  altar  and  a  cross  attached  to  the  altar  was  illegal ;  that  a 
credence  table  was  lawful  as  an  adjunct  to  the  altar ;  that 
embroidered  linen  and  lace  might  not  be  used  during  the  ad- 
ministration of  the  Holy  Communion. 


THE  CHURCH  OF  THE  PRESENT  DA  Y.    485 

Williams  v.  Bishop  of  Salisbury  and  Wilson  v.  Fendale,  1864.       chap. 
Ruled    that  a  clergyman  might  deny  the  inspiration  of  any      ^^^1, 
single  part  of  Holy  Scripture,  might  speak  of  the  merits  of  the 
Saviour  being  transferred  to  man  as  "  a  fiction,"  and   might 
express  a  hope  of  the  nltimate  pardon  of  the  damned. 

Martin  v,  Mackonochie,  1868-70.  Ruled  lighted  candles  on 
the  altar  to  be  illegal  when  not  required  for  the  purpose  of 
giving  light.  Suspended  a  clergyman  for  kneeling  during  the 
Prayer  of  Consecration,  and  elevating  the  paten  above  his  head. 

Hehhertv.  Purchas,  1871.  Ruled  that  a  j)arish  priest  infringes 
the  law  by  administering  the  Holy  Communion  in  the  vestments 
prescribed  by  King  Edward  VI. 's  First  Prayer-book,  viz.  cope, 
chasuble,  alb,  and  tunicle,  but  that  "  a  cope  is  to  be  worn  in 
administering  the  Holy  Communion  on  high  feast  days  in  cathe- 
dral and  collegiate  churches  ; "  that  wafer  bread  is  illegal ;  that 
public  mingling  of  water  with  the  sacramental  wine  is  illegal ; 
that  eastward  celebrations  are  illegal  when  the  people  cannot 
see  the  act  of  breaking  the  bread. 

Sheppard  v.  Bennett,  1871.  Acquitted  a  clergyman  who 
taught  that  "  there  was  an  actual  presence  of  the  true  Body 
and  Blood  of  our  Lord  in  the  consecrated  bread  and  wine, 
without  or  external  to  the  communicant,  and  separately  from 
the  act  of  reception ; "  that  "  the  Communion  table  is  an  altar 
of  sacrifice ;  "  that  "  adoration  is  due  to  Christ  present  upon  the 
altar." 

Jenkins  v.  Cook,  1876.  Ruled  that  a  clergyman  infringed  the 
law  in  refusing  the  Sacrament  to  a  parishioner  on  the  ground 
of  his  denial  of  the  eternity  of  punishment,  and  of  the  per- 
sonality and  existence  of  the  devil. 

Ridsdale  v.  Clifton.  Appeal  from  Lord  Penzance's  Court, 
May,  1877.  Ruled  that  it  was  illegal  to  celebrate  Holy  Com- 
munion without  a  congregation ;  that  a  crucifix  on  a  chancel 
screen,  and  coloured  mural  reliefs  representing  the  stations  of  the 
Cross,  were  illegal  ornaments :  confirmed  the  decisions  on  other 
points  in  Eebhert  v.  Purchas. 


(     487     ) 


INDEX. 


Aaron. 


Aaron,  the  British  Martyr,  7 

Abbot,  Arcbbp.  of  Canterbury,  an  un- 
satisfactory appointment,  357 ;  revives 
the  capital  punishment  of  heretics,  357 ; 
guilty  of  manslaughter,  361 ;  his  influence 
ceases  with  death  of  James  I.,  364  sq. ; 
refuses  his  imprimatur  to  Sibthorp's 
sermon,  and  is  suspended,  367 

Absolution  explahied  to  James  I.,  345 

Absolutism,  theory  of,  353  ;  maintained  by 
the  bishops  of  James  I.,  357 ;  impugned 
before  the  Reformation,  362 ;  unfortu- 
nate support  of,  by  clergy  of  Charles  I., 
363  ;  the  Revolution  its  death-blow,  434  ; 
attempted  revival  of,  under  Anne,  447. 

Addison,  good  influence  of  his  writings, 
449 

Adrian,  friend  of  Theodore,  34;  his  ser- 
vices to  literature,  38 

Advertisements,  Archbp.  Parker's,  315  sq. ; 
intention  of,  316,  and  note  ;  summary  of, 
317,  318 

Agatho,  Pope,  orders  the  reinstatement  of 
AS^ilfrid,  40 

Aggrieved  parishioners,  391,  483 

Aidan,  mission  of,  30 

Alban,  St.,  7 

Alb  ric,  Papal  legate,  his  intrusion  on 
England,  79 

Albigenses,  the,  87  and  note 

Alcock,  Bp.  of  Ely,  171 

Alcuin,  Egbert's  librarian,  39 ;  fame  as  a 
scholar,  38  ;  life  of,  49 

Aldhelm,  the  poet-preacher,  49 

Alfred,  King,  54 

Altar,  converted  by  Ridley  into  a  table,  226 ; 
the  innovation  sanctioned  by  Edward's 
government,  226 ;  Elizabeth  treats  it  in  a 
spirit  of  compromise,  301,  3'j2  ;  Laud 
enforces  ancient  position,  373,  374 ;  this 
is  made  a  Puritan  gravamen,  380 

Altar  lights,  ordered  in  1548,  225  note 

Andrewes,  Bp.  of  Winchester,  consulted  by 
Whitgift,  339,  356  ;  saves  Archbp.  Abbot 
from  deposition,  361 

Anglo-Saxon  Canons,  36,  44-46,  62 ;  uses, 
45,  46,  53 

Annates,  117,  118 ;  prohibition  of,  159 


Avignon. 

Anselm,  Archbp.  of  Canterbury,  at  issue 
with  William  II.,  77  ;  leaves  England  for 
Rome,  77,  78 ;  embroiled  with  Henry  I. 
on  Investiture  question,  78,  79 

Antholin,  S.,  collectors  of,  suppressed  by 
Laud,  373 

Apology  for  the  oath  of  allegiance,  James 
l.'s,  354 

Appeals,  growth  of,  69-71 ;  resisted,  102, 
103  ;  statute  for  restraint  of,  160 

Ap-Rice,  Cromwell's  inquisitor,  172 

Archbps.  confirmed  by  the  Pope,  114,  154 

Ariaii,  controversy,  8;  party  in  Georgian 
clnirch,  455,  456 

Ariminum,  Council  of,  8 

Aristobulus,  legendary  British  bishop,  5 

Aries,  Council  of,  8 

Arnold  of  Brescia,  87 

Articles,  the  ten,  182-184 ;  the  six,  of  Henry 
VIII. ,  194;  the  eleven,  309;  the  forty- 
two  drawn  up  by  Cranmer,  231 ;  the 
thirty-nine,  a  revision  of  the  forty-two, 
232  ;  intention  of,  232  ;  comparison  with 
the  forty-two,  232-234  ;  account  of  their 
final  settlement,  310  ;  disputed  clauses  in 
them,  310;  made  a  test  of  loyalty,  320; 
Lambeth's,  the,  339 

Arundel's  Constitutions,  129 

Atonement,  subjective  conception  of,  139, 
468 

Atterbury,  Bp.  of  Rochester,  defends  the 
rights  of  Convocation,  442 ;  proposes 
to  proclaim  the  Pretender  in  1714,451; 
banished,  451  note 

Augustine,  S.,  sent  by  Gregory,  21 ;  con- 
verts Ethelbert,  22  ;  receives  instructions 
from  Gregory,  24 ;  and  a  pall,  25 ;  his 
ultimatum  to  the  British  bishops,  26; 
his  work  overrated,  27 

Augustinian  monks,  the,  74 

Augustin's  Oak,  council  at,  26 

Autocracy,  episcopal,  growth  of  since  Re- 
furmation,  335,  336;  Laud's  administra- 
tion a!i  instance  of,  372 ;  reasonableness 
of  Presbyterian  proposal  for  its  modifica- 
tion, 404-4(j6  ;  Tillotson's  primacy,  a 
flagrant  case  of,  441 ;  the  principle  de- 
veloped so  as  to  extinguish  Convocation, 
452,  453 ;  its  modification  by  means  of 
synods  much  to  lie  desired,  477,  484 

Avignon,  migration  of  Popes  to,  1C3,  112 


488 


ECCLESIA  ANGLICANA, 


Balcanqtial. 


Balcanqual,  delegate  to  Synod  of  Dort, 

Bilo,  chaplain  to  Bp.  Poynet,  224 

B  Uguy,  Dr.,  answers  Lord  Shaftesbury,  459 

Bancroft,  Archbp.  of  Canterbury,  his  ser- 
mon at  Paul's  Cross,  336 ;  the  leading 
Churchman  at  Hampton  Court  Con- 
ference, 345  ,  succeeds  Whitgift,  350 ; 
deals  severely  with  the  Puritans,  ih. 

Bangor  Iscoed,  monks  of,  16  ;  massacred,  27 

Baptism,  British  administration  of,  18,  26 ; 
Augustine  enforces  Roman  use,  26  ; 
Elfric's  canon  on,  61 ;  Ten  Articles  on, 
183;  Office  of,  in  Prayer  Books  of  1552, 
1559,  1662,  237  ;  lay,  sanctioned  till  1604, 
236  note  ;  by  women,  345 ;  denial  of  re- 
generation in,  exculpated,  476,  484 

Baptism,  Infant,  Wall's  history  of,  449 

Barlow,  Bp.  of  Chichester,  a  violent  re- 
forming preacher,  210 ;  assists  at  Par- 
ker's consecration,  303. 

Barnes,  a  Lutheran,  burnt,  198 

Baro,  Peter,  an  Arminian,  339 

Baronial  tenure  of  bishops,  72 

Barrett,  William,  an  Arminian,  338 

Barrow,  Dr.,  Master  of  Trinity  College, 
Cambridge,  420 

Bnrton,  Elizabeth,  her  revelations  and  death, 
164 

Basie,  Council  of,  133 

Bastwick,  the  li'beller,  371 ;  compensated,  382 

Baxter,  the  Puritan,  declines  a  bishopric  at 
the  Restoration,  407  ,  a  delegate  at  Savoy 
Conference,  407  note ;  his  Reformed 
Liturgy,  408  note ;  his  Saint's  Everlasting 
Rest,  419 

Becket,  Thomas,  his  career  as  a  courtier, 
81 ;  made  Archbp.  of  Canterbury,  82 ; 
beads  the  Church  party,  82 ;  the  champion 
of  Constitutional  Government,  83 ;  coerced 
to  sign  the  Constitutions  of  Clarendon, 
84 ;  his  six  years'  contest  with  Henry  II., 
84,  85 ;  his  murder,  85  ;  his  shrine  in- 
sulted by  Henry  VIIL,  179 

Bede,  the  Venerable,  38,  39  ;  his  life,  47,  48 

Bellarmine's  description  of  15th  century 
Church,  134 

Benedict  Biscop,  39 

Benedictine  monks,  the,  51 ;  restored  at 
S.  James  Chapel,  423 

Bennett,  Shepherd  ver&us,  1871,  decision  in, 
482,  485 

Benson,  Bp.  of  Gloucester,  ordains  White- 
field,  463 

Bentley,  Master  of  Trinity,  writes  against 
Collins,  457 

Berkeley,  Bp.  of  Cloyne  (1733),  writes 
against  Collins,  457  ;  the  Alciphron,  459 

Berridge  of  Everton,  Evangelical  clergy- 
man, 469 

Beveridge,  Bp.  of  S.  Asaph  (1704),  declines 
to  succeed  Ken  at  Bath  and  Wells,  436  ; 
one  of  tlie  great  divines  of  t^ueen  Anne's 
reign,  449,  400,  463 


Breakspear. 

Bible,  translations  of :  Bede's,  48  note ; 
Wyclifs,  123  ;  Sir  T.  ]\Iore  on  earli.  r 
versions,  123  note  ;  Wyclifs  suppressed, 
129 ;  Tyndal's,  165  ;  Matthew's,  187  ; 
set  up  in  the  churches,  187,  198 ;  Cran- 
mer's,  198,  199 ;  the  Genevan,  308,  309, 
347  ;  the  Bishops',  308,  347  ;  those  in  use 
on  accession  of  James  I.,  347  ;  summary 
of  English  translations  of,  349  note  ;  the 
Bible  of  1611,  its  historj"-,  347,  348 ;  cir- 
culation of,  419,  470,  88  note 

Bigod,  Roger,  at  Council  of  Lyons,  98 

Bingham,  Joseph,  his  Antiquities  of  the 
Christian  Church,  449 

Bird,  Bp.  of  Chester,  deprived,  252 

Birinus,  missionary,  31 

Bishops,  numerous  in  British  Church,  15  ; 
Anglo-Saxon,  preside  in  county  courts, 
43;  popular  election  of,  62;  in  conflict 
with  the  monks,  88 ;  become  autocrats, 
336;  the  ten,  mobbed  and  imprisoned, 
385 ;  the  seven,  imprisoned,  tried,  and 
acquitted,  431,  432 

Bishops  in  partibus,  numerous  in  13th 
century,  104 ;  Romish,  in  England,  320 
note ;  established  by  James  II.,  424 

Bishop's  Book,  see  "  Institution,  etc." 

Bishoprics,  Anglo-Saxon,  organisation  of, 
36,  37 

Black  Bartholomew's,  411,  412 

Blackball,  Bp.  of  Exeter,  preaches  passive 
obedience,  447 

Blomfield,  Bp.  of  London,  471  note 

Bocher,  Joan,  heretic,  burnt,  229 

Bohler,  Peter,  Moravian  missionary,  463; 
influence  of,  on  Wesley,  ib. 

Boleyn,  Anne,  Henry's  marriage  with, 
149,  150 

Bolingbroke's  posthumous  works,  458 

Boniface,  S.,  instigator  of  the  Synod  of  747, 
42 ;  the  apostle  of  Germany — encourages 
Papal  encroachment — his  death,  50 

Boniface  VIIL,  Pope,  102,  103 

Bonner,  Bp.  of  London,  protests  against  tlie 
injunctions  and  homilies,  213  ;  is  im- 
prisoned and  released,  214 ;  is  ordered  to 
preach  against  the  rebels,  225  ;  is  impri- 
soned again,  226 ;  is  released,  2.13 ;  takes 
a  leading  part  in  the  Marian  persecution, 
266 ;  housed  with  Bp.  of  Lincoln,  298 ; 
placed  within  the  rule  of  the  Marshalsea 
prison,  298 

Book  of  Sports  of  James  L,  359 ;  republica- 
tion of,  377 ;  to  be  sanctioned  by  the 
clergy,  377 

Bountj^  Queen  Anne's,  institution  of,  444 

Bourne,  one  of  Mary's  chaplains,  244 ;  re- 
fuses to  help  in  Parker's  consecration,  303 

Boyle,  Mr.,  president  of  a  society  for  the 
propagation  of  the  Gospel,  419 

Bradbury,  Mr.,  dissenting  preacher,  456 

Bradford,  reformer,  imprisoned,  255 

Bray,  Dr.,  a  founder  of  the  S.  P.  C.  K.  and 
S.P.  G.  443 

Breakspear,  Nicholas,  the  only  English 
Pope,  80 


INDEX. 


489 


Bristol. 

Bristol,  bishopric  founded  at,  ITS 

Bristol,  the  I\Iethodist  pn  achers  at,  464 

British  Church,  see  Celtic 

British  and  Foreign  School  Society,  the,  470 

Brooks,  Bp.  of  Gloucester,  Papal  commis- 
sioner to  try  Cranmer,  2(59 

Brown,  Robert,  founder  of  the  Independents, 
329 

Brownists,  see  Independents 

Bruys,  Peter  de,  87 

Bucer,  a  foreign  Protestant  at  Cambridge, 
214  ;  his  remains  insulted,  276 

Bull,  Bp.  of  St.  David  (1705),  author  of 
"  Defensio  fidei  Nicenne,"  420,  453 

Bulls,  Papal,  prohibited,  117,  155 

Bunyan  denounces  the  declaration  for 
liberty  of  conscience,  428 

Burial  Laws'  Amendment  Act  of  1880,  480 

Burial  of  the  dead,  office  for,  in  the  several 
prayer  books,  238 

Burnell,  Bp.  of  Bath,  author  of  "  Statute  of 
Mortmain,"  100 

Burnet,  Gilbert,  Bp.  of  Salisbury,  at  Butch 
Court,  437  ;  reads  William's  Declaration, 
434  ;  consecrated  by  a  commission  of 
Bancroft's  appointment,  436  ;  a  Latitu- 
dinarian,  437,  441  ;  opposes  rights  of 
Convocation,  442 ;  opposes  Act  against 
Occasional  Conformity,  446 

Burton,  the  libeller,  371  ;  compensated,  382 

Bush,  Bp.  of  Bristol,  deprived,  252 

Butler,  Bp.  of  Durham,  his  Analogy,  459 


Cadoc,  Welsh  missionary,  12 

Caedmon,  48 

Caerleon,  Welsh  archbishopric,  6,  8,  15 

Calamy  (elder)  the  Presbyterian,  403,  407 

Calamy  (younger)  the  Presbyterian,  457 

Calcuith,  Council  of,  42 

Calendar,  the,  of  1549,  305  ;  of  1552,  306; 
of  1561,  306 

Calne,  Council  at,  60 

Calvin,  the  reformer,  139 ;  advises  So- 
merset to  execute  heretics,  229 

Calvinism  of  later  Elizabethan  Churchmen, 
338-340 ;  James's  support  of,  359 ;  five 
points  of,  359  sq.  ;  is  successfully  im- 
pugned by  the  Caroline  divines,  420 ;  of 
^\'hiteficld,  464,  465 ;  of  the  Evangeli- 
cals, 468 

Cambridge  University  harassed  by  James 
II.,  428,  429 

Camden  Society  at  Cambridge,  474 

Camisards  or  "  French  Prophets,"  460 

Campeggio,  Cardinal,  143 

Canons,  the,  of  1604,  351 ;  of  1640,  380,  384, 
3S5 

Canute,  61 

Caractacus,  5 

Carleton,  Bp.  of  LlandafF,  sent  to  Synod  of 
Dort,  359 

Caroline  books,  the,  49 

Caroline  divines,  celebrated  for  intellectual 
ability,  407,  419,  420 


Cliristcliiireli. 

Carthusian  monks,  74 

Cartwright,  Bp.  of  Chester,  refuses  the  oath 
to  William  III.,  435 

Cartwriglit,  Margaret  Professor,  321  ;   his 

first  and  second  admonition,  322 
"  Case  of  Allegiance  due,"  &c.  Sherlock's, 
436 

"  Case  of  Resistance,"  &c.  Sherlock's,  436 

Case,  the  Puritan,  403,  407 

Castro,  Alphonso  de,  chaplain  to  Philip  II., 
266  sq. 

Catharine  of  Aragon,  see  Henry  VIII. 

Cathedral  Chapters  remodelled* by  Dunstan, 
60 ;  by  Lanfranc,  74 ;  by  Henry  VIII. 
178 

Catliedrals,  Norman,  75 

Cecil,  Mr.,  the  Evangelical,  470 

Cedda,  30,  31 

Celibacy,  clerical,  a  theory  rather  than  a 
practice  in  Anglo-Saxon  Church,  46 ; 
measures  taken  to  enforce,  by  Odo  and 
Dunstan,  58,  59;  ordered  by  Council  of 
Winchester,  76  ;  the  rule  evaded  in 
Anglo-Norman  Church,  76,  77;  enforced 
by  the  Six  Articles,  195;  nearly  being 
reinforced  under  Edwa  d  VI.,  218,  219 ; 
denounced  by  the  imprisoned  divines  in 
1554,  255  ;  established  by  Mary,  252,  253; 
prejudice  in  favour  of,  219,  300 

Celtic  Church,  1-19 ;  peculiarities  of,  13-16 

Centralising  system,  Roman  account  of,  63, 
64 

Chad,  consecration  and  deposition  of,  35 

Cliaderton,  Mr.,  the  Puritan,  345 

Cliandler,  Dr.,  writes  against  Collins,  the 
Deist,  459 

Chantries,  appropriation  of,  under  Edward 
VI.,  209 

Characteristics  of  Men  and  Planners,  Shaftes- 
bury's, 457 

Charles  I.,  his  character  and  principles, 
363 ;  his  ecclesiastical  policy,  364 ;  at  issue 
■with  Parliaments,  366-370  ;  governs  with- 
out parliament,  370-372;  his  absolutism 
in  Cliurch  matters,  372 ;  his  republication 
of  the  Book  of  Sports,  377  ;  sends  canons 
to  Scotch  Church,  378  ;  his  Short  Parlia- 
ment, 379,  380  ;  his  Long  Parliament,  381 
sq.  ;  his  half-hearted  policy  with  regard 
to  the  Church,  385,  386  ;  his  self-sacrifice 
on  the  Church's  behalf,  390,  391 

Charles  II.,  receives  Puritan  deputation  at 
the  Hague,  403;  issues  the  "Worcester 
House  Declaration,  406 ;  summons  the 
Savoy  Conference,  407 ;  his  policy,  414, 
415;  offers  indulgence  to  dissenters,  415, 
416;  really  wishes  to  get  concessions  for 
Romanism,  414,  417  ;  effects  of  the  reign, 
418-420 

Charter,  the  Great,  91 

Cliester,  bishopric  founded  at,  173 

Chicheley,  Archl)]).  of  Canterbmy,  171 

Chillingworth,  AVilliam,  a  Latitudinarian, 
420,  455 

Christchurch,  Canterbury,  monks  of,  clahu 
to  elect  Primate,  88,  89 


490 


ECCLESIA  ANGLICANA. 


Christianity. 

"  Christianity  as  old  as  tha  Creation,"  Tin- 
dal's,  458 

Christianity,  decline  of,  at  close  of  15th 
cent.,  134;  and  in  the  Georgian  period, 
459,  460 

Chubb,  Thomas,  the  Deist,  458,  459 

Church  and  State,  set  at  variance  in  Anglo- 
Norman  period,  66  &q. ;  mutual  relations 
of,  212  ;  how  far  affected  by  modern  con- 
etitutional  changes,  68,  479 

Church  Association,  the,  483 

Church,  continuity  of,  1  and  note,  141,  142, 
279-285 

Church  Missionary  Society,  the,  470 

Church  of  England  Working  Men's  Society, 
484 

Church  rates  in  Anglo-Saxon  Church,  44 

Church  restoration,  in  reign  of  Charles  II., 
419 ;  not  thought  of  during  the  Evan- 
gelical movement,  471 ;  inspired  by  the 
Tractarian  movement,  475,  479 

Circumspecte  Jgaiis,  the,  101 

Cistercian  monks,  the,  75 

Clarendon,  Constitutions  of,  82,  83 

Clarendon,  Lord,  416 

Clarke,  Dr.  S.,  his  writings  censured  by 
Convocation,  445,  455  ;  career  of,  455  note ; 
his  Arian  Prayer- Book,  456 

Claudia  and  Pudens,  legend  of,  5 

CLomens  Romanus  on  S.  Paul's  mission  to 
the  West,  4 

Cl?rgy,  immunities  of,  80  sq. ;  scarcity  of 
under  Elizabeth,  their  degradation,  306, 
307  ;  state  of,  under  James  I.,  35s  ;  under 
Anne,  444 ;  under  the  Georges,  471 

Clericis  Laicos,  the,  102 

Cloveshoo,  meeting  place  of  the  yearly 
synod,  36  ;  synod  of  747,  42 

Cluniac  monks,  the,  74 

Cobham,  Lord,  128,  129 

Coelestine,  Pope,  sends  Palladius  and 
Patrick  to  Ireland,  11,  12 

Colchester, Colonel,  a  founder  of  the  S.P.C.K. 
and  S.P.G.,  443 

Colenso,  Bp.  of  Natal,  476 

Colet,  the  reformer,  135,  147 

Collier,  Jeremy,  the  Church  historian,  a 
Non-Juror,  436;  consecrated  by  Hickes 
and  Scotch  bishops,  heads  the  party  of 
"Usagers,"  436  note 

Collins,  Anthony,  the  Deist,  457,  458 

Colman,  the  Celtic  bishop,  32 

Colonial  Episcopate,  disallowed  by  the 
Georgian  ministries,  Wesley's,  467 ;  Dr. 
Seabury  consecrated  in  Scotland,  467  note ; 
extension  of,  since  1825,  478 

Columban,  S.,  mission  to  Scotland,  12 

Commendams,  action  about  James  I.'s 
claim  to  grant,  358 

Commendone,  Papal  envoy  to  England, 
245 

Commission  of  search  for  Church  property, 
1552,  240 

Committee  for  preferments,  William  III.'s, 
443 

Committee  of  religion,  the  Puritan,  3S4 


Convocation. 

Committees  for  scandalous  ministers,  391, 

392 ;  for  plundered  ministers,  392 
Commons,  House  of,  its  modern  formation 
hostile  to  the  Church's  interests,  479,  480 
Communion,  controversy  about,  under  Ed- 
ward VI.,  215  ;  Cranmer's  views  of,  215 ; 
in  both   kinds    allowed,   ib. ;    sacrificial 
character  of,    emphasised  in   Missal    of 
1548  more  than    in   subsequent  offices, 
216  note  ;  controversy  at  Oxford  on,  220  ; 
office  for,  in  Prayer-book  of  1552,  235 ; 
office  for,  in  Prayer-book  of  1549,  236; 
office  for,  in  several  Prayer-books,  237 
Compton,  Bp.  of  London,  denounces  policy 
of  James  II.,  423 ;   declines  to  suspend 
Dr.  Sharp,  425 ;  suspended  by  the  High 
Commission  Court,  426 ;  signs  the  invita- 
tion to  William,  432 
Confirmation,  British  office  of,  18  ;  office  in 
the  several  Prayer-books,  238  ;  explained 
to  James  I.,  345 
Conge    d'Elire,     in    the   prje-Reformation 
period,  161 ;  suppression  of,  208  and  note ; 
its  re-establishment,  253 
Congregationalists,  see  Independents 
"  Connection  of  Sacred  and  Pagan  History," 

Humphrey  Prideaux's,  449 
Constance,  Council  of,  133 
Constantino's  donation,  57 
Conventicle  Act,  1st,  415 
Conventicle  Act,  2nd,  416 
C  invention  Parliaments,  the,  406,  434 
Convocation,  the  Church's  tax-paying 
agency,  95 ;  but  difficult  to  distinguish 
from  Parliament,  96 ;  its  ancient  organ- 
isation still  survives,  96,  97 ;  Wolsey  pro- 
poses to  amalgamate  the  Houses  of,  145, 
146 ;  a  verdict  on  the  Divorce  question 
wrung  from,  153 ;  acknowledges  the 
royal  supremacy  with  a  qualification,  156 ; 
unjustly  fined  by  Henry  VIII.,  156,  157  ; 
petitions  against  Annates,  159  ;  suggests 
the  severance  from  Rome,  159  ;  Cromwell 
presides  at,  182  ;  accepts  the  Ten  Articles, 
183 ;  disallows  the  Pope's  power  to  sum- 
mon a  council,  184 ;  its  connection  Avith 
the  "Bishops'  Book,"  185,  186;  sanctions 
Henry's  Six  Articles,  194,  195  ;  sanctions 
the  "  King's  Book,"  200  ;  overridden  by 
Cranmer,  212,  232 ;  sanctions  Prayer- 
book  of  1549,  217  ;  but  not  the  Prayer-book 
of  1552,  218  ;  reactionary  on  the  accession 
of  Mary,  251 ;  absolved  by  Pole,  261 ; 
pleads  vainly  for  restoration  of  Church 
property,  261 ;  its  petition  in  1558,  277 ; 
prejudiced  against  reformatory  measures, 
291 ;  Prayer-book  revised  without  its  sanc- 
tion, 292 ;  its  Puritan  members  oppose 
the  Thirty-nine  Articles,  310  ;  they  wish 
to  authorise  Nowell's  Catechism,  312  ; 
and  petition  against  Church's  ritual,  312, 
313;  overridden  by  the  16th  cent,  primates, 
336 ;  does  not  sanction  the  Praj'er-book 
revision  of  1604,  346,  347;  passes  the 
Canons  of  1604,  351,  352 ;  exculpates  Laud 
as  a  Synod  b.y  the  Canons  of  1640.  380 ; 


INDEX, 


491 


Conybeare. 

resigns  its  powers  of  self-taxation,  414  ; 
ignored  by  William  III.'s  government  as 
long  as  possible,  440;  Tillotson's  suppres- 
sion of,  provokes  the  Convocation  contro- 
versy, 441,  442 ;  the  Lower  at  issue  with 
the  Upper  House,  442,  445 ;  business  done 
in  1711,  445;  suppression  of,  under 
George  I.,  452-454;  revival  of,  in  the 
present  reign,  477 

Convbeare,  Dr.,  answers  Tyndal,  the  Deist, 
459 

Conyers,  Mr.,  the  Evangelical,  470 

Corporate  action  of  Anglo-Saxon  clergy, 
41,  42 

Cosin,  Bp.  of  Durham,  declared  superstitious 
and  scandalous,  382  ;  raised  to  the  episco- 
pate, 4U7  ;  at  Savoy  Conference,  407 ; 
one  of  the  committee  for  review  of 
Prayer-book,  410  ;  the  Prayer-book 
adapted  in  accordance  with  his  sugges- 
tions, 410,  411 

Courtenay,  Archbp.  of  Canterbury,  122 

Court  of  Delegates,  the,  481 

Courts,  ecclesiastical,  72-101 

Coverdale,  Bp.  of  Exeter,  imprisoned  under 
Mary,  249 ;  assists  at  Parker's  consecra- 
tion, 303  ;  his  Bible  translations,  349  note 

Cowell,  Dr.,  a  Puritan  author,  353 

Cox,  Bp.  of  Ely,  290,  304 

Cranmer,  rise  of,  152 ;  made  Archbp.  of 
Canterbury  and  divorces  Henry  VIII. 
from  Catharine,  153,  154;  gets  a  Papal 
Bull  for  his  consecration,  155  ;  examines 
Elizabeth  Barton,  164  ;  acquiesces  in  the 
visitation  of  monasteries,  173;  helps  to 
compose  the  Ten  Articles,  182  ;  con- 
demns Lambert,  193;  his  Bible,  198,  347  ; 
unpopularity  of,  204 ;  is  indifferent  to 
Somerset's  spoliation,  206  ;  inclines  to 
the  doctrine  of  consubstantiation,  206 ; 
modification  of  his  religious  opinions, 
207 ;  morally  weak,  207 ;  his  two  great 
principles,  208  ;  gets  a  licence  from 
Edward  VI. ;  secures  the  abolition  of  the 
'■  Conge  d'Elire,  208 ;  vindicated  from  Eras- 
tianism  by  Dean  Hook,  2o9  ;  influenced  by 
the  foreign  Protestants,  214,  232  ;  view  of 
communion  modified,  215 ;  unfair  treat- 
ment of  Bp.  Gardiner  in  controversy, 
221 ;  his  connection  with  the  lltjormatio 
Leg  urn,  239 ;  joins  in  Lady  Jane's  con- 
spiracy, 242 ;  is  ordered  to  keep  his 
house,  244 ;  refuses  to  fly,  248 ;  his  in- 
discreet manifesto,  248 ;  is  imprisoned, 
248 ;  bis  share  in  Henry's  divorce  ex- 
posed, 250,  251  ;  moved  to  Oxford  and 
compelled  to  dispute,  254  ;  disowns  tran- 
Bubstantiation,  254  ;  condemned,  255 ; 
appears  before  Bp.  Brooks,  269  ;  con- 
demned by  the  i'ope  and  degraded,  273 ; 
induced  to  recant,  274;  renounces  his  re- 
cantations, 274,  275  ;  burnt,  275 

Crewe,  Bp.  of  Durham,  124  note  ;  one  of  the 
High  Commission  Court,  426 

Criminals,  clerical,  tried  in  Anglo-Saxon 
Civil  Courts,  43 ;    but  in  Ecclesiastical 


Brake. 

Courts  under  William  I.,  72  ;  consequent 
disputes  in  the  reign  of  Henry  II.,  80,  81 

Crome,  the  Reformer,  255 

Cromwell,  Oliver,  his  Protectorate,  399  ;  his 
persecution  of  Churchmen,  399  sq. ;  his 
overtures  to  the  clergy,  400 ;  ejects  se- 
questered clergy  from  tuitional  offices, 
400,  401 

Cromwell,  Thomas,  rise  of,  167,168  ;  becomes 
Vicar-General,  163 ;  his  visitation  of 
monasteries,  168-178  ;  presides  at  Convo- 
cation, 182-185 ;  encourages  di  orderly 
Protestantism,  191 ;  his  fall,  197 


Davenant,  delegate  to  Synod  of  Sort,  359 

David,  S.,  12 

Day,  Bp.  of  Chichester,  imprisoned  under 

Edward  VI.,  227 
Declaration  attached  to  the  Articles,  368 ; 

by  Charles  I. 
Declaration  of  Indulgence,  Charles  II. 's,  416 
Declaration  of  indulgence,  James  11. 's,  427  ; 

to  be  read  in  the  churches,  430 
Declaration  of  Rights,  the,  434 
Decretals,  the  false,  56,  57 
"  Defender  of  the  Faith,"  title  of,  149 
De  Hsereticis  Comburendis,  the,  127 
D  ists,  the  so-called,  457-459 
Deprivation  of  bishoi^s  and  clergy,  295 
De  Religiosis,  the,  100,  101 
Desecration  of  church  ornaments,  211 
Di  Unitate,  Pole's,  198,  245  note 
Deusdedit,  Archbp.  of  Canterbury,  34,  35 
D  rectory  of  public  worship,  the,  387 
Disputation  at  Westminster,  1559,  296,  297 
DiSsenters,  take  orders,  314 ;  fall  into  sec- 
tarian formations,  328-330;    Charles  11. 
coquets  with,  415,  416 ;    number  of,   in 
1676,    413 ;    James    II.   wins,    by  offers 
of  Indulgence,   422,   428;    William   HI. 
gives  immunity  to,  under  certain  limi- 
tations, 438;  statutes  against,  under  Anne, 
446  ;  indulgence  of,  under  George  I.,  452, 
456,  457  ;  freed  from  all  restrictions,  479  ; 
harass  the  Church,  479  sq. ;  numbers  of, 
conjectured,  480  note 
Di.'ine  right,  doctrine  of,  under  James  I., 
358 ;  maintained  by  Laud  and  other  di- 
vines,  under  Charles  I.,  363,   367,  368 ; 
under  Charles  II.,  418 ;  maintained  by  a 
few  bishops  under  James  II.,  424  ;  revived 
by  the  Tories  under  Ijueen  Anne,  447 
Divorce,  Henry  tlie  Eighth's,  149-154;  Cran- 

mer's  part  in,  exposed,  250,  251 
Do  ^trines  in  Anglo-Saxon  Church,  46 
Dodwell,  Henry,  Camden  Professor,  a  Non- 
Juror,  436 
Do  uinicans,  the,  107-109 
Do  iiinick  de  Guzman,  106 
Do  t,  the  Synod  of,  359,  360 
Do  A  sing,  ^Villiam,  in  the  eastern  counties, 

395 
Drake,  Dr.,  his  "  Memorial  of  the  Church 
of  England."  447 


492 


ECCLESIA  ANGLICANA. 


Dunstan. 

Dunstan,  Archbp.  of  Canterbury,  his  early 

history,  59  ;  career  at  court,  ib. ;  primacy, 

ousts  the  secular  clergy,  60 
Du  Pin,  correspondence  with  Archbp.  Wake, 

454 
Duppa,  Bp.  of  Exeter,  ordains  at  Eichmond, 

401 

E 

Eadbald  converted,  23 

Eanfleda,  Queen  of  Oswy,  observes  the 
Continental  Easter,  32 

E  ister,  British  computation  of,  17,  26,  32 

E  clesiastical  laws  of  William  I.,  68 

E  -kart,  the  mystic,  126 

E  Idius,  account  of  Wilfrid,  40 

Eiward  the  Confessor,  extolled  by  monks; 
unpatriotic  administration  of,  62 

Edward  I.,  ecclesiastical  policy  of,  99-103 

Edward  VI.,  precocity  of,  205  ;  the  bishops 
take  licences  from,  208 ;  maladministra- 
tion of  his  government,  222  sq.\  evil  effects 
of  his  reign  on  religion,  208,  224,  240 

Egbert,  Archbp.  of  York,  46,  48 

Eleutherius,  mission  to  Britain,  6 

Elfric,  the  homilist,  56,  60,  61 

Elizabeth,  Queen,  under  restraint  in  Mary's 
reign,  256 ;  religious  status  at  accession 
of,  279  sq. ;  her  religious  opinions,  281  &q. ; 
her  coronation,  287  ;  claims  only  to  be 
"  Supreme  G-overnor,"  289 ;  reclaims 
first-fruits  and  tenths,  290 ;  desires  a 
higher  standard  of  ritual,  295  ;  estab- 
lishes Court  of  High  Commission,  298  ; 
her  injunctions,  299-301;  her  ai)pointment 
of  a  Primate,  302  &q.  ;  her  treatment  of 
the  Puritan  divines,  305  ;  her  modifica- 
tions of  the  thirty-nine  Articles,  310 ;  her 
half-hearted  support  of  the  Church— due 
to  Leicester's  influence,  314,  315  ;  gives 
no  sanction  to  the  Advertisements,  316  ; 
her  suspension  of  Archbp.  Grindal, 
326,  327  ;  receives  a  rebuke  from  Whit- 
gift,  331;  supports  Whitgift  as  archbp., 
334 

Engagement,  the  Independent,  enforced, 
395,  398 

English  Church  Union,  the,  484 

Episcupacy,  attacked  in  Parliament,  384 ; 
abolished,  386  ;  wise  reform  of,  suggested 
by  Puritans,  404 

Episcopate,  extension  of,  a  necessity,  162, 
478 

Erasmus,  148 

Erastianism,  Cranmer's  inclination  to,  209  ; 
growth  of,  under  Elizabeth,  336 

Erigena,  John  Scotus,  54,  55 

"  Erudition  of  any  Christian  Man,"  199,  200 

E-says  and  Reviews,  exculpated,  476-484 

E^sex,  conversion  of,  23  sg. 

Etca^tera,  oath,  381 

Etlielbert,  conversion  of,  22,  23 

Ethelburga  converted,  28 

Eusebius's  account  of  Christianity  in 
Britain,  3 

Evangelical    movement,  the,  468  472;  its 


Frithona. 

great  names,  469,  470  ;  its  institutions, 
470;  its  failure  to  stir  the  Church,  47u- 
472  ;  some  of  the  party  join  in  the  Puri- 
tan persecution  of  Tractarians,  475  ;  and 
of  Ritualists,  477  ;  but  most  learn  to  sym- 
pathise with  the  revival  of  Anglicanism, 
477 

Exclusion,  Bill  of,  418,  420 

Excommunication,  lay,  explained  to  James 
I.,  345 


Pagius,  Paul,  a  Protestant  at  Cambridge, 

214  ;  his  remains  insulted,  276 
Fairfax,  Dr.,  Fellow  of  Magdalene,  Oxford, 

deprived,  429 
Falkland's  opinion  of  episcopal  autocracy, 

405  note 
Familists,  the,  329,  330,  399 
Farmer,  Anthony,  nominated  by  James  II. 

to  be  president  of  Magdalene,  Oxford,  429 
Fasting,    declared  not    meritorious    under 

Edward  VI.,  220 
Feckenham,  abbot  of  Westminster,  talked  of 

for  the  primacy,  303  and  note 
Felix,  the  missionary,  31 
Fell,  Bp.  of  Oxford,  "helps  to  suppress  Mon- 
mouth's insurrection,  423 
Feuner,  the  marprelate  libeller,  334 
Ferrar,  Bp.  of  St.  David's,  deprived,  252 ; 

burnt,  268 
Feudal  tenure  of  bishops  under  AVilliam  I., 

72 
Fifth  Monarchists,  399 
First-fruits  and  tenths,  restored  by  Mary, 

275 ;     taken    back    by    Elizabeth,    290 ; 

ceded  to  the  Church  by  Anne,  444 
Fisher,  Bp.   of  Rochester,  educational  re- 
former, 148 ;   opposes  the  divorce,  151 ; 

averse  to  royal  supremacy,   163 ;  made 

cardinal,  165 ;  done  to  death  under  Treason 

Act,  157,  165  ;  career  of,  166,  167 
Fitzjocelyn,  Archbp.  of  Canterbury,  77 
Fitzralph,  Archbp.  of  Armagh,  118  and  note 
Fletcher,  Mr.,  of  Madeley,  the  evangelical, 

469 
Fox,  Bp.  of  Winchester,  148 
Frampton,    Bp.    of    Gloucester,    preaches 

against  popery  under    James   II.,   425 ; 

deprived  as  a  Non-Juror,  435  note 
Francis,  S.,  of  Assizi,  106 
Francis,  Allan,  sent  by  James  II.  to  Cam- 

))ridge,  428 
Franciscans,  the,  106-109 
Frederick    I.,    his    negotiations    with    the 

English  Church,  449,  450 
Freedom  of  Church  guaranteed  by  the  Great 

Charter,  91 
Frowen,  Archbp.  of  York,  410 
Friars,  the  mendicant,  revival  of  religion 

by,  105, 106 ;  their  success  in  England,107 ; 

they  become  demoralised,  108 ;  and  end 

as  university  pedants,  109 
"  Friends  of  God,"  the,  126 
Frithona,  see  Deusdedit 


INDEX, 


493 


Froude. 

Fronde,  Mr.,  the  Tractarian,  474 

Frvtb,  the  Lutheran,  166 ;  burnt  by  More, 

iii2 
Fursy,  the  missionary,  31 

Or 

Grardiner,  Bp.  of  Winchester,  a  leader  of 
the  old  learning  party,  181,  204 ;  not  in- 
cluded in  the  council,  205  ;  pleads  for  the 
retention  of  images  and  holy  water, 
210,  211;  maintains  the  liberties  of  the 
Church,  212,  213 ;  is  imprisoned  and 
deprived,  213 ;  refuses  to  sign  a  con- 
fession of  guilt,  227 ;  released  from 
prison,  243;  becomes  privy  councillor 
under  Mary,  243  ;  a  commissioner  to  try 
heretics,  263  ;  resigns  the  post,  268 

Garentin,  monk,  a  Lollard  martyr,  12S 

Gastrell,  Bp.  of  Chester,  1714,  answers 
Dr.  Clarke,  456 

Gauden,  Bp.  of  Exeter,  407  and  note 

Gaul,  Church  of,  its  connection  with  British 
Church,  6 

Gaunt,  John  of,  patronizes  Wyclif,  120  sg. 

Gerard,  a  Lutheran,  burnt,  198 

Gerhard,  Walter,  leader  of  the  Publicani,  86 

Germanus  in  Britain,  10 

Gerson,  the  mj-stic,  126 

Gibbon,  the  sceptic,  458  ;  answered  by  Bp. 
Watson,  459 

Gibson,  Bp.  of  London,  writes  against 
Woolston,  the  Deist,  459 

Giffard,  Bonaventure,  Bp.  of  Madura, 
placed  at  Magdalene,  Oxford,  430 

Gildas,  Welsh  missionary,  12 

Gladstone,  Mr.  W.  E.,  on  the  Church  of 
furty  years  ago,  472 ;  on  persecution  of 
Kitualism,  475  note  ;  on  the  new  Supreme 
Court  of  Appeal,  481 ;  on  proceedings  in 
ecclesiastical  cases,  483  note 

Glastonbury,  Legend,  5 ;  the  school  at,  59 ; 
Dunstan's  Benedictine  Monastery  at,  59 

Gloucester,  bishopric  founded  at,  178 

Goodrich,  Bp.  of  Ely,  181 

Gorham  judgment,  the,  476,  484 

Gostwick,  Sir  John,  accuses  Cranmcr,  204 

Greek,  revival  of,  134,  135 

Gregorian  chants,  74 

Gregory  I.,  sees  Anglo-Saxon  boys  at 
Home,  20 ;  sets  out  on  a  mission  to  Eng- 
land, 2l;  sends  Augustiu. ,  21  <q. 

Gregory  VII.,  Pope,  magnifies  the  assump- 
tions of  the  Decretals  ;  claim  to  be  Suze- 
rain of  Europe,  69 ;  is  resisted  by  William 
I.,  73 

Gregory  IX.,  his  encroachments  in  Eng- 
land, 97 

Grey,  John  de,  Bp.  of  Norwich,  89 

Grey,  Lady  Jane,  usurpation  of,  212,  243 

Grindal,  Archbp.  of  Canterbury:  conse- 
crated Bp.  of  London,  304;  succeeds 
Matthew  Parker,  324 ;  his  puritanical 
proclivities,  325  ;  falls  foul  of  the  queen 
in  the  matter  of  prophesyings,  325,  320  ; 
is  suspended,  327 


Hertford. 

Grocyn,  the  reformer,  135,  148 

Grosseteste,  Bp.  of  Lincoln,  resists  Papal 
encroachments,  98,  99 ;  encourages  scrip- 
tural study,  123  note 

Guest,  Bp.  of  Pvochester,  296, 305 

Guildford,  Lord,  a  founder  of  theS.  P.  C.  K. 
and  S.  P.  G,,  443 


Hackingiion,  monastery  at,  89 

Hague,  Puritati  deputation  to,  403 

Hales,  Mr.  A.,  promotes  the  negotiations 
with  Dr.  Jablouski,  450 

Hales,  Sir  Edward,  mock  trial  of,  424 

Hall,  Bp.  of  Exeter,  sent  to  Synod  of  Dort,359 

Hallam,  Bp.  of  Salisbury,  133 

Hallelujah  victory,  10 

Hamerkeu,  the  mystic,  126 

Hamilton,  Bp.  of  Galloway,  355 

Hammond,  Dr.  Henry,  keeps  up  church 
life  during  the  interregnum,  401 ;  his 
"  Practical  Catechism,"  419 

Hampton  Court  Conference,  345  sq. 

Harlej',  the  reformer,  Bp.  of  Hereford,  253 

Hatfield,  council  at,  in  680,  39 

Heath,  Bp.  of  Worcester,  imjirisoned  under 
Edward  VI.,  227  ;  released,  243 

Heathen  practices,  how  treated  by  Saxon 
Christianity,  45 

Hebbert  v.  Purchas,  485 

Henricians,  the,  87 

Henry  I.,  dispute  with  Anselm,  78 

Henry  U.,  the  dispute  about  clerical  im- 
munity, 80 ;  his  appointment  of  Becket, 
82 ;  the  six  years'  contest,  84,  85 ;  cedes 
the  points  at  issue  after  Becket's  murder, 
85 

Henry  III.,  94-99 

Henry  VIII. ,  marriage  with  Catharine, 
136,  137  ;  applies  for  a  divorce,  149-154 ; 
marries  Anne  Boleyn,  154  ;  claims  to  be 
supreme  head  of  the  Church,  156 ;  his 
Treason  Act,  ]  57 ;  anti-papal  statutes, 
158-162  ;  private  negotiations  with  Rome, 
160, 161;  his  dissolution  of  the  monasteries, 
168-178 ;  is  excommunicated,  179  ;  his 
religious  opinions,  180  ;  his  ten  Articles, 
182-184 ;  his  injunctions,  185,  187  ;  his 
contempt  for  the  Protestants,  188,  189  ; 
his  policy  towards  the  two  religious 
parties,  189-194 ;  his  six  Articles,  194  sq. ; 
his  "  English  Primer,"  201 ;  his  will,  205 

Heptarchj'-,  Church  of,  coTisolidated,  33  sg. 

Heibert,  Lord  Chief  Justice,  424 

Herbert  of  Cherbury,  Lord,  a  Deist  writer, 
:57 

He  -etics,  British,  9 ;  in  12th  cent.,  86,  87  ; 
legislation  against  in  15th  cent.,  127  sq. ; 
burnt  under  HenryVi  II.,  191-193, 19.s  sq.  \ 
burnt  under  Edward  VI.,  229;  Refoi- 
matio  Legum  on  punishment  of,  24u ; 
law  against,  under  Mary,  263  sq. ;  two, 
1mmt  by  James  I.,  357 

Hert'brd,  synod  at,  in  673,  36 

Hertford,  Lord,  see  Somerset 


494 


ECCLESIA  ANGLICANA. 


Hervey. 

Hervey,  Mr.,  of  Wellyn,  the  evangelical, 

47(1 
Hie  ces,  George,  Dean  of  Worcester,  a  Non- 
Juror,  436;  consecrated  as  Bp.  of  Thet- 
f  ird,  436  note 
Hi.;li  Commission,  the  Court  of,  its  institu- 
tion in  1559,  298,  299 ;  its  encroachment 
on  the  functions  of  the  secular  courts, 
under  James  I.,  353 ;  its  employment  by 
Charles  I.,  370  sq.  \  declared  incapable  of 
existence  at  Restoration,  425  ;  yet  practi- 
cally restored  by  James  II.,  426 ;   pro- 
ceedings of,  426,  428,  429,  432  ;  dissolved 
by  James,  433 
Hilary  on  British  orthodoxy,  9 
H!ilde  brand,  see  Gregory  VII. 
Hll,  Rowland,  the  evangelical,  470 
Hilsey,  Bp.  of  Rochester,  author  of  a  "Pri- 
mer," 2ul 
Hoadly,  Bp.  of  Bangor,  etc.,  writes  in  reply 
to  Blackhall's  sermon,  447  ;  promoted  for 
his  Erastian  opinions,   453 ;   his  sermon 
censured  in  Convocation,  453  ;  this  causes 
the  suspension  of  Convocation,  453 ;  and 
the  Bangorian  controversy,  455 ;   writes 
against  Anthony  Collins,  457 
Hobbes,  Thomas,  a  Deist  writer,  457 
Hudgkins,    bishop-suffragan    of    Bedford, 

assists  at  Parker's  consecration,  303 
Holgate,  Archbp.  of  York,  imprisoned  under 
•    Mary,  249  ;  deprived,  252  ;  released,  256 
H  Alis,  Mr.,  a  Puritan  M.P.,  369 
Holy  wood,  Christopher,  author  of  the  Nags- 
head  fable,  304 
Homage,  to  Pope  refused  by  William  I.,  TS ; 

t  >  kings  by  prelates,  78  sg. 
"  Homilies  of  Elfric,"  60 
"  Humilies,  First  Book  of,"  202 ;  enforced 
by  the  injunctions  of  Edward  VL,  211 ; 
second  book  of,  sanctioned  by  Convoca- 
tion, 311,  312 
Hook,  Justice,  a  founder  of  the  S.  P.  C.  K. 

and  S.  P.  G.,  443 
Hoolcer,  master  of  the  Temple,  337  ;  his 

"  Ecclesiastical  Polity,"  337 
Hooper,  an  admirer  of  Northumberland, 
224 ;  made  Bp.  of  Gloucester,  230  ;  his 
Puritan  objections  to  the  episcopal  vest- 
ments, ih. ;  imprisoned  by  Cranmer  and 
submits,  and  is  consecrated,  231 ;  im- 
prisoned under  Mary,  249  ;  deprived,  253  ; 
burnt,  26S 
Horsley,  Bp.  of  St.  David's,  etc.,  answers 

Dr.  Priestly,  456 
Hough,  Dr.,  elected  President  of  Magdalene, 

Oxiord,  429 
Howe,  the  dissenter,  428 
Hume,  sceptic,  458 ;  answered  by  Dr.  Paley, 

459 
Humphreys,  Dr.,  the  Puritan,  319 
Hunn,   Richard,   a    disorderly    Protestant, 

190  sg. 
Huntingdon,   Coimtess  of,  a   patroness   of 

Whitetield,  her  cunnexion,  466 
Hy,  monastic  college  at,  13;  missionaries 
sent  from,  30 


James  II. 


Imag-es,  controversy  on  use  ot,  52,  53; 
Alfred's  view  of,  54 ;  the  Ten  Articles 
on,  183  ;  the  Injunctions  of  1538  on,  188  ; 
defended  by  Gardiner,  210  ;  destroyed  by 
Somerset,  211 ;  destruction  of,  by  the  Com- 
mission of  1559,  299  ;  Elizabeth's  use  of, 
305 

Impropriations,  lay,  sanctioned  by  Cardinal 
Pole,  262 

Ina,  founds  English  College  at  Rome,  53 

Independents,  the,  origin  of,  329  ;  in  the 
ascendant,  397 ;  intolerant  character  of, 
397,  398 

Indulgences,  traffic  in,  110,  111 

Injunctions,  the  first  of  Edward  VI.,  211 ; 
the  second  of  Edward  VI. ,  225 ;  IMary's, 
245  ;  Elizabeth's,  299-301 

Innocent  III.,  Pope,  extends  papal  assump- 
tions, 92,  93 

Innocent  XL,  Pope,  gives  no  support  to 
James  II.,  422 

"  IniKA'ations,"  Laud's  religious,  372  sq. 

Inquisition  founded,  88  ;  system  of,  imported 
by  Philip  II.,  264  &q. 

"  Institution  of  a  Christian  Man,"  185,  186 

Interregnum,  the,  397-402 

Investiture  of  bishops,  62;  controversy 
about,    78 

lona,  see  Hy 

Ireland,  Welsh  mission  to,  12 

Isidore's  decretals,  56 


Jablouski's  negotiations  with  the 
iuiglish  Church,  449 

Jacobite  proclivities  of  the  clergy,  451  sq. 

James  I.,  his  dislike  of  tlie  Presbyterians, 
341;  his  character  and  views,  3-i2;  be- 
haviour at  tlie  Hampton  Court  Conference, 
345  ;  suggests  the  Englisli  Bible  of  1611, 
347  ;  appoints  translators,  348  ;  favours 
the  theory  of  Absolutism,  353 ;  his 
apologies  for  the  oath  of  allegiance,  354 ; 
restores  episcopacy  to  Scotland,  355,  356; 
appoints  Abbot  to  the  Primacy,  356,  357  ; 
burns  tv/o  heretics,  357 ;  his  Book  of 
Sports,  359  ;  sends  delegates  to  the  Synod 
of  Dort,  ih. ;  extends  toleration  to  the 
Romanists,  360 ;  bad  effects  of  his  reign, 
361 

James  II.,  indebted  to  the  clergy  for  his 
accession,  418,  422 ;  alliance  with  Penn, 
422 ;  not  supported  by  Rome,  ih. ;  his 
coronation,  422,  423;  announces  inten- 
tion of  retaining  Romanist  officers,  423; 
relies  on  loyalty  of  clergy,  424 ;  gives 
Church  preferment  to  Romanists,  424 ; 
revives  High  Commission  Court,  426 ; 
suspends  Bp.  Compton,  426 ;  issues  the 
Declaration  for  Liberty  of  Conscience, 
427  ;  extolled  by  the  dissenters,  428  ;  his 
aggressions  at  the  Universities,  428-430  ; 


INDEX. 


495 


Jaye. 

dismissal  of  lords  lieutenants,  430  ;  orders 

the  declaration  to  be  read  in  Churcli,  430  ; 

is  disobeyed,  431 ;  sends  the  bishops  to 

trial  for  libel,  432 ;  seeks  coimsel  of  the 

bishops,  433 
Jaye,  George,  author  of  a  Primer,  201 
Jeffreys,  Lord  Chancellor,  426,  429 
Jenkins  v.  Cook,  485 
Jerome,  a  Lutheran,  burnt,  198 
Jewel,  Bp.,  his  "Apology,"  307,  308 
John,  King,  pprsecution  of  the  Church,  90  s^. 
Joseph  of  Arimathea,  legend  of,  5 
Julius,  supposed  martjT,  7 
Ji;lius,  ni..  Pope,  negotiates  with  Mary, 

245 ;    secretly  appoints    Pole    legate  to 

England,   246;  his  bargain    with  Mary, 

257 
Justin  jMartyr,  account  of  Christianity  in 

Britain,  3 
Justus,  Bp.  of  Rochester,  23 ;  Archbp.  of 

Canterbury,  23 
Juxon,   Archbp.  of  Canterbury,  at  Savoy 

Conference,  407  ;  receives  order  for  review 

of  Prayer-book,  410 


Keble,  j\Ir.  a  Tractarian,  his  "  Christian 
Year,"  474 

Kempis,  Thomas  a,  126 

Ken,  Bp.  of  Bath  and  AVells,  denounces 
Romanism  under  James  II.,  425 ;  one  of 
the  Seven  Bishops,  431,  432 ;  refuses  the 
oath  to  William,  435  ;  receives  a  year  of 
grace,  ib. ;  retires  under  protest,  436 

Kent,  conversion  of,  22  sq. 

Kettlewell,  John,  the  Xon-Juror,  436 

Kiffin,  the  dissenter,  428 

"King's  Book,"  see  " Necessary  Erudition " 

Kitchiu,  Bp.  of  Llandaff,  takes  the  oatla  of 
supremacy,  297 

Knewstubbs,  Mr.,  the  Puritan,  345 

Knox,  a  Scutch  Reformer,  inveighs  against 
Edward  Vl.'s  government,  2o6 


Iiake,  Bp.  of  Chichester,  one  of  the  Seven 
Bishops,  431,  432  ;  a  Non-Juror,  435 

Lamb,  Bp.  of  Brechin,  355 

Lambirt,  burnt  by  Cranmer,  193 

Lamplugh,  Archbp.  of  York,  conduct  at 
Exeter,  434 

Lanfranc,  Archbp.  of  Canterbury,  Abbot  of 
Bee,  68  ;  oppresses  the  Anglo-Saxon 
clergy,  74 ;  imitates  William's  policy  as 
regards  Rome,  73 

Langland,  autlior  of  "Piers  Ploughman's 
vision,"  IIH,  119 

Langton,  Archbp.  of  Canterbury,  favourite 
of  Innocent  III.,  90 ;  leads  the  patriot 
party,  90,  91 ;  suspended  by  Innocent  111., 
92  ;  holds  his  own  against  Rome,  92,  97 

Lasco,  John  a,  a  foreign  Protestant  in  Lon- 
don, 214 ;  his  formula}  incorporated  in 
our  Communion  office,  235,  236 


Luther. 

Lateran  Council  of  1215,  92 

Latimer,  Bp.  of  Worcester,  181 ;  resigns 
when  the  Six  Articles  are  enforced,  194  ; 
a  true  reformer,  denounces  Edward's 
government,  224;  compelled  to  dispute 
at  Oxford,  253,  254 ;  is  condemned,  255  ; 
and  burnt,  270  ;  biography  of,  272,  273 

Laud,  Archbp.  of  Canterbury,  a  favourite 
of  Prince  Charles,  365  ;  raised  to  bishopric 
of  St.  David's,  365  ;  is  practically  primate, 
363,  365  sq. ;-  officiates  at  the  Coronation, 
365  ;  wants  the  Church  to  disown  Calvin- 
ism, 365,  368  ;  account  of  his  administra- 
tion, 370;  becomes  Bp.  of  London   and 
Primate,   372;    not  really  a  persecutor, 
372  ;  but  a  great  religious  reformer,  372 
account   of    his   proceedings,    372-376 
falselj'    charged  with    Romanism,   375 
attacked  by  the  Long  Parliament,  3S2 
sent  to  the  Tower,  3s2 ;  his  unfair  trialj 
3S9  ;  condemned  by  Bill  of  Attainder  and 
execiited,  390 

Laurentius,  Archbp.  of  Canterbury,  27 

Law,  William,  a  Non-Juror,  436  ;  his  "  Seri- 
ous Call  "  and  "  Christian  Perfection," 
460,  462 ;  his  tendency  towards  mysti- 
cism, 460  ;  influence  of,  on  John  Wesley 
and  othei's,  462 

Lawyers,  clerical,  104 

Lay  Helpers  in  Elizabeth's  reign,  307 

Lee,  Archbp.  of  Y'ork,  leader  of  the  old 
learning  party,  181 

Legate,  Bartholomew,  burnt  for  heresy,  357 

Legate,  the  English  Primate,  legatus  natus, 
37  note,  113,  114 

Leicester,  Earl,  a  professed  Puritan,  313  sq. 

Leigh,  Cromwell's  inquisitor,  172 

Leighton,  Cromwell's  inquisitor,  172 

Leighton,  the  libeller,  371 

Leslie,  Charles,  the  controversialist,  a  Non- 
Juror,  436 

Lessons,  the  Table  of,  1561,  305 

Libellers,  the  Marprelate,  334,  335 ;  the 
Puritan,  pmiished  by  the  Star  Chamber, 
371,372 

Lichfield,  archbishopric  of,  42,  51,  52 

Liddell  v.  ^Vesterton,  and  Liddell  v.  Beal, 
484 

Litany,  the  English,  200 

Lloyd,  Bp.  of  St.  Asaph,  one  of  the  Seven 
Bishops,  431,  432 ;  deprived  as  a  Non- 
Juror,  435  note;  heads  the  schism,  436 
and  note 

Lollard  movement,  the,  125,  126 ;  its  disor- 
derly character,  125  ;  legislation  against, 
127-129 

London,  Cromwell's  inquisitor,  172 

Long  Parliament,  381  sq. 

Lords  Lieutenants  dismissed  by  James  II., 

430 
Lucius,  British  king,  mission  to,  5 

Lupus,  Bp.  of  Troyes,  10 

Luther,  protests  against  Roman  abuses, 
138 ;  character  of  his  system,  140 ;  dog- 
matises on  relative  value  of  Scriptures, 
140 ;  answered  by  Henry  VIII.,  145,  149 


49^ 


ECCLESIA  ANGUCANA. 


Lyons. 

Lyons,  Council  of,  98 
Lyons,  Poor  men  of,  87,  83 

Mackworth,  Sir  H.,  a  founder  of  the 
S.P.C.K.  and  S.P.G.,  443 

Magdalene  College,  Oxford,  severities  of 
James  IL  at,  429,  430 

Maintenance  of  clergy,  Anglo-Saxon,  pro- 
visions for,  44 

Mainwaring,  Dr.,  preaches  in  behalf  of 
Absolutism,  368 

Manning,  Cardinal,  and  others,  secession  of, 
476 

Manton,  the  Puritan,  403 

"  Martin  :\Iarprelate  "  libels,  the,  334  s^. 

Martin  v.  Maekonochie,  484 

Martyrs,  British,  7,  8 

Mary,  Queen,  persecuted  under  the  reign  of 
Edward  VI.,  228;  and  passed  over  by 
Edward's  will,  242;  Lady  Jane  Grey's 
rebellion  against,  242 ;  is  enthusiastically 
received  in  London,  243;  suppresses  all 
preaching,  2(5;  Wyatt's rebellion  against, 
251;  her  injunctions  to  the  clergy,  215, 
252 ;  deprivation  of  married  prelates,  252  ; 
and  married  clergy,  253 ;  married  to 
Philip,  256;  her  negotiations  with  Pope 
Julius,  258  ;  reception  of  Pole,  258,  259  ; 
her  establishment  of  religious  persecu- 
tion, 264  sg. ;  refuses  to  spare  Cranmer, 
274  ;  restores  first-fruits,  275  ;  dies,  278 

Masses  for  the  dead,  esteemed  by  Cranmer 
In  1547,  206;  impugnedby  Somerset  when 
the  chantries  are  to  be  plundered,  210 

Massey,  John,  lay  Dean  of  Christ's  Church, 
424 

JIatrimonial  restrictions,  Anglo-Saxon,  46 

Matrimony,  office  for,  in  the  several  Prayer- 
books,  238 

Meal  Tub  Plot,  the,  418 

Melancthon,  the  reformer,  139 

Mellitus,  Bp.  of  London,  23;  becomes 
archbp.,  28 

Memorial  of  the  Church  of  England,  Dr. 
Drake's,  447 

Mendicants,  see  Friars 

Methodist  Church  guild  at  Oxford,  the, 
463 ;  name  applied  to  Wesley,  White- 
field,  and  their  followers,  466  ;  history  of 
the  movement,  462-468;  of  the  post- 
humous sects,  468  note 

Mew,  Bp.  of  Winchester,  helps  to  suppress 
Monmouth's  insurrection,  423 

Millenary  petition,  the,  343 

Milner,  Rev.,  the  evangelical,  470 

IMissal,  the  Latin,  English  of  1548,  216 

Mixed  Chalice,  not  ordered  in  Prayer-book 
of  1552,  237 ;  prohibited  by  Purchas 
judgment,  485 

Monasteries,  numerous  in  Britain,  16; 
Saxon,  58 ;  Anglo-Norman,  70 ;  how 
utilised  by  the  Pupe,  58,  70 ;  new  varie- 
ties of,  74,  75  ;  growing  pretensions  of,  in 
12th  cent.  88,  89 ;  supplanted  by  the  uni- 


Ooeasioaal. 

versity  system,  101 ;  theory  of  life  in, 
105 ;  Cromwell's  scheme  for  spoiling, 
168;  pretexts,  169,  170;  precedents,  170, 
171 ;  detailed  account  of  proceedings,  171- 
176 ;  consequences,  176-179 

Monk,  summons  the  Long  Parliament,  401 ; 
declares  for  Charles,  402 

Monks,  new  orders  of,  come  in  with  the 
Normans,  74,  75,  see  "Monasteries"  and 
Regulars 

More,  Hannah,  Evangelical,  470 ;  account 
of  the  Church,  471 

More,  Henry,  Latitudinarian,  420 

More,  Sir  Thomas,  educational  reformer, 
148;  succeeds  Wolsey  as  Chancellor,  151; 
assailed  by  the  Treasons  Act,  157  ;  cannot 
accept  Royal  Supremacy,  164 ;  and  is  bo- 
headed,  165  ;  career  of,  165,  166  ;  account 
of  the  suppression  of  Wyclif's  Bible,  123, 
130  notes 

Mortmain,  Statute  of,  100;  suspended  for 
twenty  years  under  Mary,  262 ;  modified 
under  Anne,  444 

Morton,  Archbp.  of  York,  Reformer,  134 

Mountague,  Dr.,  his  writings,  361 ;  censure 
of,  in  Commons,  366 

N 

Nagr's  Head  fable,  the,  304 

Nelson,  Robert,  a  Non-Juror,  437  ;  eminent 
as  a  devout  High  Churchman,  437,  460  ; 
writes  against  Dr.  Clarke,  456 

Neville,  Dean  of  Canterbury,  341 

New  Learning  at  Oxfoi'd,  134,  135 ;  en- 
couraged by  Wolsey,  144 ;  the  partisans 
of,  181 ;  how  disparaged,  182 

Newman,  Cardinal,  a  Tractarian,  474; 
secedes  to  the  Roman  Communion,  476 

Newton,  Sir  Isaac,  a  Cambridge  representa- 
tive before  the  High  Commission,  429 ; 
inclined  to  Arianism,  455 

Newton,  Mr.,  of  Olney,  the  Evangelical,  470 

Nicsea,  Council  of,  8 

Nicolson,  Bp.  of  Carlisle,  on  the  oath  of 
allegiance,  437 

Non-Jurors,  the,  435-437  ;  subsequent  his- 
tory of,  436  note 

Norfolk,  Duke  of,  opponent  of  Cranmer, 
204  ;  a  privy  councillor  under  Marj',  243 

Northumberland,  Duke  of,  his  administra-     \ 
tion  under  Edward  VL,  224;  imprisons     ! 
Bp.  Tonstal,  227  ;  persuades  King  Edward 
to  appoint  Lady  Jane  Grey  his  successor, 
242 ;  is  imprisoned  and  executed,  243 

Northumbria,  conversion  of,  28;  Chris- 
tianity restored  in,  by  Oswald,  30 

Norwich,  diocese,  hotbed  of  Puritanism, 
331,  375,  413 

N  jwell's  Catechism,  234,  312 


Oates,  Titus,  reveals  a  Romanist  con- 
spiracy, 417 

Occasional  conformity,  account  of,  445,  446 ; 
Act  against,  446 ;  repealed,  452 


INDEX, 


497 


Oehin. 

Ochin,  Bernard,  a  foreign  Protestant  and 
polygamist,  214 

Odo,  Archbp.  of  Canterbury,  58;  his 
measures  of  reform,  59 

OfFa,  King,  founds  the  Lichfield  arch- 
bishopric, pays  Peter's  Pence,  51,  52 

Oldcastle,  Sir  John,  128,  129 

Old  Learning  party,  180,  181 ;  harassed 
under  Edward  VI.,  221,  222  ;  reaction  in 
favour  of,  243,  246,  257,  258 

Orders  of  clergy,  the  seven,  61 

Orders,  Anglican,  their  validity  admitted  by 
Cardinal  Pole,  263  note  ;  their  continuity, 
280-285 

Ordinal  of  1550,  218 

Ordinals,  in  the  several  Prayer-books,  238 

Origen,  account  of  Christianity  in  Britain,  3 

Ornaments,  church,  desecration  of,  211 ; 
ornaments  rubric,  and  prescription,  294 
and  note 

Oseney,  bishopric  founded  at,  178 

Osmund,  Bp.  of  Sarum,  76 

Oswald's  Law,  60 

Oswy,  King  of  Northumbria,  keeps  British 
Easter,  convinced  by  Wilfrid  at  Council 
of  Whitby,  32  ;  appointment  of  bishops, 
34,  35 

Overall,  Bp.,  author  of  Catechism  on  Sacra- 
ments, 340 

Oxford,  harassed  by  James  IT.,  429  ;  Trac- 
tarian  revival  begins  at,  474 


Paine,  the  sceptic,  458 

Paley,  Dr.  William,  rector  of  Bishop- 
Wearmouth  :  his  Evidences  and  Natural 
Theology,  459 

Pall,  the,  sent  to  Augustine  by  Gregory,  25  ; 
sent  to  Archbp.  of  Lichfield,  52  ;  declared 
necessary  for  ofiice  of  metropolitan, 
50,  113  -,  secured  by  Cranmer,  154 

Palladius  in  Ireland,  11 

Palmer,  Sir  William,  a  Tractarian,  474 

Pandulph,  Papal  nuncio,  90 

Papal  pretensions  at  close  of  Saxon  period, 
63,  69  ;  their  growth,  113-118 

Pardoners,  Papal,  110 

Paris,  George  von,  a  heretic,  burnt,  229 

Parker,  Bp.  of  Oxford,  parasite  of  James  11., 
424  note ;  made  President  of  Magdalene, 
Oxford,  429,  430 

Parker,  Matthew,  Archbp.  of  Canterbury, 
early  history  of,  2s7,  238  note;  his  re- 
ligious opinions,  288  ;  his  consecration, 
303  sg. ;  revises  the  Calendar,  and  helps 
to  provide  a  lectionary,  305,  306  ;  his  share 
in  the  Bishops'  Bible,  308,  309  note ; 
issues  the  advertisements  to  suppress 
Puritanism,  315  s^. ;  summary  of  his 
work,  322,  323 ;  his  remains  insulted  by 
the  Puritans,  323 

Parochial  system  existent  before  Theodore's 
primacy,  37,  45 

Passive  obedience,  see  "Divine  right." 


Pole. 

Patrick,  S.,  mission  of,  11;  his  work  not 

permanent,  12 
Patrick,  Bp.  of  Chichester,  a  Latitudinarian, 

420,  440 
Patronage,  Papal  usurpation  of,  113-115 
Paul,  S.,  supposed  mission  to  Britain,  4 
Paul  III.,  Pope,  makes  Fisher  a  cardinal, 

165  ;  excommunicates  Henry,  179 
Paul  IV.,  Pope,  recalls  Cardinal  Pole,  277  ; 

insults  Queen  Elizabeth,  286 
Paulinus,     missionary    to    Northumbria, 

27, 23  ;  tiis  see  at  York — his  work  upset — 

becomes  Bp.  of  Rochester,  29 
Peacham,  Rev.  E.,  victimised  imder  James 

IL,  359 
Pearce,  Zachary,  Bp.  of  Rochester,  writes 

against  Woolston,  the  Deist,  459 
Pearson,  Bp.  of  Chester,  419 
Pechell,  Dr.,  Vice-Chancellor  of  Cambridge, 

punished  by  High  Commission  Court,  429 
Peckham,  Archbp.  of  Canterbury,  96,  100 
Pecock,   Bp.  of  Chichester,  an  eclectic  of 

Romanising    tendencies  —  his   career  — 

punished  for  exalting  the  Pope,  130-132 
Pelagius,  the  British  heretic,  condemned  at 

councils — influence  in  Britain,  12 
Penitential  system,  Anglo-Saxon,  46,  47 
Penn,  the  Quaker,  patronised  by  James  II. , 

422  ;  urges  the  Fellows  of  Magdalene  to 

submit,  429 
Penry,  the  Marprelate  libeller,  334 
Percival,  Mr.,  a  Tractarian,  474 
Persecutions,  religious,  in  12th  century,  87, 

83 ;    in   15th    century,    127-132 ;    under 

Henry  VIIL,   189-196,  198;   under  Ed- 
ward VI.,  222  &q. ;  under  Mary,  263  sg. ; 

under  James  I.,  357  ;  by  the   Puritans, 

393  sg.  ;  in  the  present  reign,  482 
Perth,  general  assembly  at,  355,  356 
Peter  Jlartyr,  a  foreign  Protestant,  at  Ox- 
ford, 214,  234 
Peters,  Hugh,  the  Puritan,  400 
Peter's  Pence,  originates  with  OfFa,  52 ;  paid 

by  William  I.,  73 ;  subsequent  history 

of,  ih.  note. 
Peterborough,  bishopric  founded  at,  178 
Peto,  friar,  appointed  legate,  277 
Petre,    Father,   in    the    Privy  Council    of 

James  II.,  424 
Philpot  the  reformer,  imprisoned,  255 
Pierce,  Bp.  of  Bath  and  Wells,  imprisoned, 

382,  3s3 
Piers  Ploughman  on  Bishops  in  partibus, 

104;  on  the  ilendicants,  109;  on  abuses 

in  Church,  118  ;  his  imitators,  118,  119 
Pilgrimage  of  Grace,  174,  175 
Pilgrimages,  50,  51,  110 
Pilkington,  Bp.  of  Durham,  318 
Pisa,  Council  of,  133 
Pius    IV.,    Pope,    offers   to    sanction    our 

Prayer-book,  319 
Pius  v.,  Pope,  his  bull  against  Elizabeth, 

282,  320 
Plan  of  Pacification,  the  Methodist,  468 
Pole,  Reginald,  denounces  Henry  VIII. — is 

made     cardinal — his    mother    executed, 

2    K 


498 


ECCLESIA  ANGLICANA. 


Poole. 

193  ;  is  made  legate  to  England,  245, 246 ; 
short  account  of,  245  note ;  returns  to 
England,  257 ;  absolves  the  nation,  258- 
261 ;  and  the  clergy,  261 ;  his  concessions, 
263 ;  becomes  priest  and  archbp.,  275  ; 
forced  to  head  the  Marian  persecution, 
276 ;  his  legative  commission  revoked, 
277  ;  dies,  27^8 

Poole,  Bp.,  refuses  to  help  in  Parker's  con- 
secration, 303 

Porteus,  Bp.  of  London,  an  evangelical,  469  ; 
his  work  conti-asted  with  Bp.  Blomfield's, 
471  note 

Poynet,  Bp.  of  Winchester,  an  immoral 
ultra-Protestant,  213  ;  his  Catechism,  234 

Practical  Catechism,  Hammond's,  419 

Prcemimire,  the  statutes  of,  117  ;  Wolsey 
assailed  by  means  of,  147 ;  clergy  un- 
justly menaced  by,  147,  155  sq. ;  laity 
escape,  158;  those  of  Henry  VIII.  abo- 
lished, 251 ;  clergy  ask  to  have  explained, 
261 

Prayer-book  of  1549,  216;  prepared  by 
a  committee  of  divines,  217  ;  sanctioned 
by  Act  of  Uniformity,  ib. ;  satisfies  no- 
body, 218  ;  of  1552,  234  ;  the  Communion 
Office  of,  235  ;  never  came  into  use,  236  ; 
abused  by  the  foreign  Protestants,  239  ; 
of  1559,  292  sq. ;  its  informal  revision  at 
the  Hampton  Court  Conference  (1604), 
346;  use  of,  proscribed,  388;  of  16G2, 
account  of  its  compilation,  410,  411 ;  com- 
pared with  the  earlier  Prayer-books,  236- 
238,  411  note 

Precisians,  see  Puritans 

Predestination  controversy,  the,  338  sq. 

Presbyterian,  Hampton  Court  Conference 
(1604),  236  note,  346 ;  Covenant  cruelly 
enforced,  387  ;  Directory  and  Classes,  388  ; 
system  too  orderly  for  the  rebels,  388,  389 ; 
deputation  to  the  Hague,  403 ;  proi^osal 
to  modify  the  autocratic  episcopacy  of 
modern  times,  404,  405 ;  James  II.  makes 
concessions  to,  427  ;  sect  largely  infected 
by  Socinianism,  456 

Prideaux,  Humphrey,  Dean  of  Norwich,  his 
Connection  of  Sacred  and  Pagan  History, 
449 

Priestly,  Dr.,  the  Socinian,  confuted  by 
Archd.  Horsley,  456 

Primer,  the  Iving's,  200  ;  other  Primers,  201 

Privy  Council  Committee  "  regulates  "  the 
municipal  corporations,  430 ;  takes  the 
place  of  the  High  Court  of  Delegates, 
476,  481 ;  Ritualists  tried  by,  482 ;  deci- 
sions of,  484,  485 

Propliesyings,  the,  325 

Protestant,  tlie  term  applied  to  our  Church, 
342,  343,  and  note 

Protestants,  foreign,  enter  England  under 
Edward  VI.,  214 ;  their  influence  on  the 
Church,  214;  their  insolence,  214  note; 
their  flight  at  Mary's  accession,  247,  232 

Protestantism,  its  origin,  138  ;  its  principles, 
139;  its  schismatic  tend'^ncy,  140;  its 
relation  to  the  lieformation.  141 ;   how 


Reformation. 

treated  by  Henry  VIII.,  145,  182;  its 
disorderly  character,  191 ;  some  of  its  mar- 
tjTS,  192,  193;  Edward  VI. 's  reign  more 
propitious  to,  214 ;  espoused  by  North- 
umberland, 224 ;  reaction  against,  223, 
224,  246  sq. 

Provision,  of  benefices,  97 ;  protested  against, 
103;  of  bishoprics  under  Martin  V.,  116 

Prynne  the  libeller,  371 ;  compensated,  382 

Public  Worship  Regulation  Act,  483 

Publicani,  the,  86 

Pudens  and  Claudia,  legend  of,  5 

Purgatory,  doctrine  of,  61,  184 

Puritans :  Hooper,the  first  Puritan  confessor, 
230,  231 ;  position  of  the  faction  on  the 
accession  of  Elizabeth,  280 ;  their  pre- 
judices humoured,  233;  object  to  the 
XXXIX  Articles,  310;  supported  by 
Leicester,  313 ;  often  dissenters  at  heart, 
314 ;  Parker  coerces  them  by  means  of 
the  Advertisements,  315  sq. ;  encouraged 
by  Grindal,  325 ;  become  sectarian,  328 ; 
are  subjected  to  Whitgift's  three  tests, 
332 ;  issue  the  Marprelate  libels,  334 ; 
draw  up  their  millenary  petition,  343; 
appear  at  the  Hampton  Court  Conference, 
345  ;  are  severely  treated  by  Bancroft, 
350 ;  their  "  abridgment  of  the  Lincoln 
ministers,"  352 ;  encouraged  by  Abbot, 
357 ;  their  Sabbatarianism  hated  by 
James  I.,  359  ;  gain  popularity  because 
opposed  to  absolutism,  361,  363,"  366  ;  the 
Puritan  libellers,  punished  by  the  Star 
Chamber,  311  sq.;  their  irreverent  prac- 
tices, 373-375 ;  they  try  to  enforce  Sabba- 
tarianism, 377  ;  they  persecute  the  clergy, 
382  sg.,400  sq.;  and  desecrate  the  churches, 
395;  Puritans  at  the  Universities,  395,  396 ; 
they  persecute  the  High  Churchmen  of 
the  present  reign,  482  sq. 

Pusey,  Dr.,  a  Tractarian,  474 

a 

Quakers,  liberated  by  James  II.,  422 

Quarto-deciman  observance  of  Easter,  17, 18 
Queen  Anne's  Bounty,  institution  of,  444 
Quia  Emptores,  the,  100 
Quinquarticular  Controversy,  359,  360 

R 

Rabamis  Maurus,  opponent  of  Tran- 
substantiation,  55 

Raikes,  Robert,  printer,  introduces  Sunday- 
schools,  470 

Ranters,  the,  399 

Real  Presence,  doctrine  of,  distinct  from 
Transubstantiation,  55,  56,  207,  254,  482, 
485 

"  Reformatio  Legum,"  produced  by  Cran- 
mer's  committee,  239  ;  never  authorised, 
ib. ;  amount  of,  239,  240 

Reformation,  English,  much  needed,  134, 
135  ;  how  aifected  by  Protestantism,  141 ; 
disgraced  by  thf  leading;  men  of  Edward 
VI. 's  reign,  207  sq. ;  and  by  sectarinn  ten- 


INDEX, 


49? 


Heformation. 

dencies,  214 ;  its  mismanagement  causes 
an  insurrection,  223 

Reformation  Parliament,  154  s^. 

"  Reformed  Liturgy,"  Baxter's,  408 

Reformers,  in  the  14th  cent.,  118  sg. ;  in 
the  15th,  134 ;  in  the  16th,  147 

liegiiim  JJvnum,  the,  456,  457 

Regular  clergy,  conflict  with  secular,  57  sq. ; 
Papal  tools  to  weaken  the  national  Church, 
58,70 ;  oust  the  secular  chapters  from 
cathedrals,  74  ;  growing  pretensions  of,  in 
12th  century,  88,  89  ;  resisted  by  Grosse- 
teste,  98,  99 ;  weakened  by  use  of  the 
universities,  101 ;  of  little  use  as  pastors, 
104. 105 ;  swept  away  under  Henry  VIII., 
168-179 ;  chapters  of,  at  cathedrals,  re- 
organised, 178 ;  restored  by  Mary,  252, 
253 ;  by  James  II.,  424,  425 

Regulation  of  the  universities,  395 

Eeligious  Tract  Society,  470 

Renard,  the  Imperial  Ambassador,  245 

Reservation  of  Benefices,  97  ;  protested 
against,  103 ;  of  the  English  Primacy, 
114  ;  of  Bishoprics,  115,  116 

Revision  of  Prayer-book  in  Low  Church 
interests  attempted,  440 

RejTiolds,  Ep.  of  Norwich,  a  Puritan  dele- 
gate to  the  Hague,  403 ;  and  to  the  Savoy 
Conference,  407 ;  made  a  bishop,  407 

Rich,  Edmund,  Archbp.  of  Canterbury, 
98 

Richard,  Archbp.  of  Canterbury,  86 

Richardson,  Chief  Justice,  377 

Ridley,  preacher  at  Paul's  Cross,  210 ;  made 
Bp.  of  London,  226 ;  illegally  substitutes 
tables  for  altars,  226 ;  his  low  view  of 
the  Holy  Communion,  235 ;  .joins  Lady 
Jane  Grey's  faction,  and  is  imprisoned, 
243 ;  compelled  to  dispute  at  Oxford,  253, 
254  ;  is  condemned,  255  ;  and  burnt,  270  ; 
biography  of,  271 

Ridsdale  v.  Clifton,  485 

Ritualism  in  modern  dissenting'chapels,  475 
note 

Ritualists,  the,  482 ;  persecution  of,  482-485 

Rogers,  the  reformer,  255,  268 

RoUe,  Richard,  translates  the  Psalter,  123 
note 

Romatne,  Mr.,  the  Evangelical,  470 

Ptoman  Catholic  Disabilities,  334,  417,  454, 
479  note. 

Roman  Encroachment,  early,  54,  63,  64 ; 
growth  of,  69,  70,  73,  79,  97 ;  resisted 
under  Edward  I.,  100,  101,  105  ;  in 
bishoprics,  114, 115 

Rome,  separation  from,  154-161 

Root  and  Branch  Bill,  386 

liouse,  Mr.,  a  Puritan  M.  P.,  369 

Rubric,  the  Black,  293 

Rye  House  Plot,  the,  418 

s 

Sabbatarian  Controversy,  see  Sunday 

question 
Sacheverell,  Dr.,  his  sermon,  trial,  sentence, 


Sherlock. 

and  subsequent  preferment,  448 ;  causes 
the  overthrow  of  the  Whigs,  444,  449 

Sacramental  test,  the,  354 

"  Saints'  Everlasting  Rest,"  Baxter's,  419 

Salter's  Hall  Controversy,  the,  456 

Sampson,  Dean,  a  Puritan,  319 

Sancroft,  Archbp.  of  Canterbury  (1677),  or- 
dered to  abridge  Coronation  Service,  422 ; 
issues  royal  injunction  prohibiting  con- 
troversial preaching,  425  ;  declines  to  act 
as  a  High  Commissioner,  426 ;  refuses  to 
circulate,  the  Declaration  of  Indulgence, 
431 ;  committed  to  the  Tower,  tried,  and 
acquitted,  432 ;  loyal  to  the  last,  433 ; 
willies  William  to  be  cnstos  regni,  434 ; 
refuses  the  oath  of  allegiance,  435 ;  his 
deprivation,  436 

Sanderson,  Bp.  of  Lincoln,  407 

Sandys,  Bp.  of  Worcester,  305 ;  proposes  to 
Erastianizs  the  Church,  313 

Saravia,  Adrian,  his  defence  of  Episcopacy, 
336 

Sardica,  Council  of,  8 

Sarum,  Use  of,  76 

Savonarola,  the  reformer,  134 

Savoy  Conference,  the,  appointment  of,  407  ; 
Sheldon's  management  of,  408 ;  proceed- 
ings in,  409,  410 

Sawtry,  William,  a  Lollard  martyr,  127 

Schism,  the  Romish,  320  note 

Schism  Bill,  the,  446 ;  repealed,  452 

Scory,  Bp.  of  Chichester,  publishes  Cran- 
mer's  manifesto  without  leave,  249 

Scotland  swears  fealty  to  Rome,  91  note; 
restoration  of  Episcopacy  to,  354-356 ; 
canons  for,  drawn  up  by  Charles  I.,  378  ; 
liturgy  for  it,  378 

Scott,  Mr.,  the  Evangelical,  470 

Seabm-y,  Dr.,  consecrated  Bp.  of  Connecti- 
cut, 467 

Sects,  Puritan,  during  the  interregnum,  399 

Seekers,  399 

Sees,  Episcopal,  plundered  under  Edward 
VI.,  222,  227 

Selsey,  Bishopric  at,  founded  by  Wilfrid,  40 

Sententiarii,  the,  109 

Sequestered  clergy,  provision  for  families 
of,  394 

Seventy  Years'  Captivity,  the,  103 

Shaftesbury's  "  Characteristics,"  457 

Sharp,  Archbp.  of  York,  his  sermon  against 
Popery  at  his  Church  of  St.  Giles,  425 ; 
Compton  declines  to  suspend  him,  425; 
preferred  under  William  III.,  441 

Shaxton,  Bp.  of  Salisbury,  194 

Sheldon,  Archbp.  of  Canterbury,  maintains 
Anglicanism  during  the  interregnum, 
401 ;  made  Bp.  of  London  and  the  Savoy 
Conference  meets  at  his  house,  407  ;  skil- 
ful conduct  of  the  debate,  408  ;  his  pri- 
macy aids  the  revival  of  Anglicanism, 
413;  persuades  the  clergy  to  resign  right 
of  self-taxation,  414 

Sheppard  v.  Bennett,  485 

Sherfield,  Dr.,  the  Puritan,  371 

Sherlock,  Dean  of  St.  Paul's,  calculation  of 


500 


ECCLESIA  ANGLICANA. 


Sherlock 

number  of  dissenters  in  1676,  413;  de- 
nounces Komanism  under  James  II.,  425  ; 
writes  the  "Case  of  Resistance"  as  a 
Non-Juror — leaves  the  Non-Jurors  and 
writes  the  "  Case  of  Allegiance,"  436 

Sherlock,  Thomas,  Bp.  of  London,  author  of 
the  "  Trial  of  the  Four  Witnesses,"  459 

Short  Parliament,  the,  379,  380 

Shower,  SLr  Bartholomew,  author  of  "  Letter 
to  a  Convocation  Man,"  442 

Sibthorpe,  Dr.,  preaches  in  behalf  of  Abso- 
lutism, 367 

Simeon,  Mr.,  the  Evangelical,  470 

Six  Articles,  the,  repealed,  210 

Skinner,  Bp.  of  Oxford,  uses  the  Church 
services  at  Taunton,  394,  401 

Smalbroke,  Bp.  of  Lichfield,  writes  against 
Woolston,  the  Deist,  459 

Smalridge,  Bp.  of  Bristol,  promotes  the 
negotiations  with  Dr.  Jablouski,  450 

Society  for  the  Promotion  of  Christian 
Ivnowledge,  foundation  of,  443 

Society  for  the  Propagation  of  the  Gospel, 
its  precursor  in  reign  of  Charles  II.,  419  ; 
its  foundation,  443 

Socinianism,  spread  of,  among  the  dis- 
senters, 456 

Solemn  League  and  Covenant,  the,  378 ; 
accepted  by  Parliament  and  forced  upon 
the  country,  387  ;  and  clergy,  393 

Somerset,  Duke  of,  becomes  Lord  Protector, 
205  ;  an  ultra-Protestant,  205  ;  plunders 
the  Church,  205  ;  demolishes  churches  in 
London,  206  ;  confiscates  the  revenues  of 
the  Chantries,  210  ;  is  disgraced,  224 ; 
his  heresy  commission,  229 

Soto,  Pedro  de,  Spanish  ecclesiastic,  266 

South,  Dr.,  420 

Spanish  ecclesiastics  in  England,  265  ; 
establish  the  Marian  persecution,  266  sq. 

Spanish  Match,  the,  of  Mary's  reign,  251, 
256  ;  of  James  I.'s  reign,  360 

Sparke,  Dr.,  a  Puritan  Delegate,  345 

Spires,  Diet  of,  138 

Spotswood  consecrated  Archbp.  of  Glasgow, 
355 

Sprat,  Bp.  of  Rochester,  424  note ;  one  of 
the  High  Commission  Court,  426;  reads 
the  declaration  in  Westminster  Abbey, 
431 ;  leaves  the  Commission,  433 

Star  Chamber  Court,  severities  of,  370-372 

State  connection,  modern  anomalies  in, 
479 

Statesmen,  clerical,  in  13th  cent.,  95,  104 

Stigand,  Archbp.,  anoints  Edgar  Atheling, 
62  ;  is  deposed  as  an  irreconcilable,  62, 
68,  71 

Stillingfleet,  Bp.  of  Worcester  (1689),  a 
Latiti;dinarian,  420 

Stock,  Mr.,  introduces  Sunday-schools,  470 

Stokesley,  Bp.  of  Durham,  a  leader  of  the 
old  learning  party,  181 

Stony  Sabbath,  the,  378 

Submission  of  the  clergy,  158 

Sudbury,  Archbp.  of  Canterbury,  murdered, 
122 


Tonstal. 

Sufferings  of  the  clergy  in  the  Puritan  per- 
secution, 393  &q. 

Sunday,  the,  question  in  Elizabeth's  reign, 
337,  338  ;  in  James  I.'s  reign,  344  ;  under 
Charles  I.,  376 

Sunday  Schools,  origin  of,  470 ;  made  sub- 
sidiary to  the  Anglican  revival,  478 

Supplication  of  Beggars,  the,  166 

"Supplication  of  Souls,"  Sir  T.  More's,  166 

Supremacy,  Royal,  Act  of,  62,  73,  155  ;  how 
accepted  by  Convocation,  156  ;  its  repeal, 
157  ;  under  Elizabeth,  289 

Surplice  riot,  the,  475 

Sussex,  conversion  of,  40 

Swift,  champion  of  ecclesiastical  toryism, 
449 ;  writes  against  Anthony  Collins, 
457 

Synods,  desirable  as  a  check  to  episcopal 
autocracy,  405  and  note,  406,  477,  484: 
(see  Autocracy) 

T 

Tanquelm,  87 

Tauler,  the  mystic,  126,  460 

Taxation  of  clergy  apart  from  laity,  95,  96, 
414 

Taylor,  Jeremy,  Bp.  of  Down  and  Connor, 
419 

Taylor,  reformer,  Bp.  of  Lincoln,  253,  255 

Taylor,  reformer.  Dr.  R.,  burnt,  263 

Taylor,  William,  Lollard  martyr,  128 

Temporalities,  Churcb,  confiscated  by 
Henry  VIII,  168-179  ;  and  by  the  Govern- 
ment of  Edward  VI.,  205  sg. ;  the  laity 
averse  to  their  restoration,  256,  257 ;  the 
Pope  allows  their  retention,  262 

Tenison,  Archbp.  of  Canterbury,  442 

Tertullian,  account  of  Christianity  in 
Britain,  3 

Tests  of  Conformity,  under  Elizabeth,  322 ; 
those  of  Charles  II.,  417  ;  modified,  452  ; 
repealed,  479 

Thadiocus,  Archbp.  of  York,  14 

Theodore  of  Tarsus,  Archbp.  of  Canter- 
bury, sent  from  Rome,  34  ;  deposes  Chad, 
35 ;  breaks  up  the  large  dioceses,  36 ; 
supposed  founder  of  the  parochial  sys- 
tem, 37  ;  father  of  Anglo-Saxon  litera- 
ture, 38  ;  and  of  our  diocesan  organisation, 
37,  41 ;  his  independence  of  Rome,  39 

Theonas,  Bp.  of  London,  14 

Thirleby,  Bp.  of  Ely,  273 ;  persuades  Cran- 
mer  to  recant,  274 

Thorpe,  William,  the  Lollard  martyr,  128 

Throgmorton,  the  Marprelate  libeller,  334 

Tindal,  Dr.,  the  Deist,  458 

Tithes,  53 

Toland's  "  Christianity  not  mysterious," 
457 

Toleration,  growth  of,  420,  437  ;  and  Bill 
of,  under  William  III.,  438. 

Tonstal,  Bp.  of  Durham,  a  leader  of  the  old 
learning  party,  181 ;  excluded  from  the 
Council,  205 ;  his  estates  coveted  by 
Northumberland,  227  ;  is  imprisoned,  ib.  ; 


INDEX. 


501 


Tonsure. 

released,  243 ;  refuses  to  help  at  Parker's 
consecration,  303 

Tonsure,  British,  18 

Toplady,  Mr.,  the  Evangelical,  469 

Tract  No.  XC,  474 

Tractarian  movement,  473  sg. 

Transubstantiation,  origin  of  the  dogma, 
55 ;  not  accepted  by  Anglo-Saxon  Church, 
56 ;  declared  an  article  of  faith  in  13th 
century,  56  ;  rejected  by  Wyclif,  124 ; 
sanctioned  by  ten  Articles,  183  ;  by  the 
six  Articles,  195 ;  Cranmer  confounds 
with  trans-accidentation,  221  and  note ; 
disowned  by  Cranmer  at  Oxford,  254  ;  de- 
nounced by  the  imprisoned  divines  in 
1554,  255 

Trask,  the  Puritan,  359 

Treasons  Act,  Henry  VIII. 's,  165;  repealed 
under  Mary,  251 

Trelawney,  Bp.  of  Bristol,  one  of  the  Seven 
Bishops,  431  note,  432 

Trialogue,  Wyclif's,  122,  123 

Triers  of  candidates  for  the  ministry,  388, 
400 

Trinoda  necessitas,  the,  43 

Turner,  Dean,  a  Puritan,  31 9 

Turner,  Bp.  of  Ely,  one  of  the  Seven  Bishops, 
431,  432 ;  deprived  as  a  Non-Juror,  435 ; 
heads  the  schism,  436  and  note 

Tyndale,  his  Bible  translation,  165, 166,  349  ; 
assailed  in  Sir  T.  More's  "  Dialogue,"  166 

u 

XJdal,  Nicholas,  Marprelate  libeller,  334 

Unam  Sanctam,  the,  102 

Uniformity,  Acts  of,  enforcing  Prayer-book 
of  1549,  217  ;  enforcing  Prayer-book  of 
1552,  236 ;  enforcing  Prayer-book  of 
1559,  294  ;  enforcing  Prayer-book  of  1662, 
411 

Union  Bill  of  William  III.,  439 

Unity  of  Church  precedes  Unity  of  State,  41 

Universities,  friars  at  the,  108,  109 ;  judg- 
ment on  Henry  VIII.'s  divorce  case 
wrung  from,  152,  153;  plundered  under 
Edward  VI.,  222 

Urban  II.,  Pope,  77 

Usher,  Archbp.  of  Armagh,  384 ;  his  scheme 
for  limiting  episcopal  autocracy  by  means 
of  synods,  405  note. 

Usurping  incumbents  forced  to  resign,  411, 
412 

«  Utopia,"  Sir  T.  ]More's,  148 


Vanists,  399 

Venn,  Rev.,  of  Huddersfield,  Evangelical, 

469 
Venn,  of  Clapham,  Evangelical,  470 
Vermigli,  alias  Peter  Martyr,  214 
Vestment  rubric    in    the    several  Prayer 

Books,  238 
Vicars,  monastic,  105 
Villagarcia,  Juan  de,  Spanish  ecclesiastic, 

266 


Whitgiffc. 

Visitation  of  Monasteries,  see  Monasteries 
Visitation  of  the  Sick,   Office  for,   in  the 

several  Prayer-books,  238 
Vow  in  favour  of  Calvinism,  the  parlia- 
mentary, 369 

W 

Wafer  bread,  injunctions  and  rubrics  on, 
237  ;  ordered  by  Elizabeth,  302 

WagstafFe,  the  Non-Juror,  consecrated  Bp. 
of  Ipswich,  436  note ;  opinion  of  the 
bishops  of  the  establishment,  452 

Wake,  Archbp.  of  Canterbury,  answers 
the  "Letter  to  a  Convocation  Man,"  442 ; 
corresponds  with  Bossuet,  454;  receives 
letters  from  Du  Pin  as  to  union  with  the 
Gallican  Church,  454 

Waldenses,  the,  87  note,  88 

Wales,  accepts  Anglo-Saxon  usages,  42 

Walker's  "Sufferings  of  the  Clergy,"  393, 
394 

Walker,  Obadiah,  the  Piomanist,  424 

Wall,  William,  Rev.,  his  "  History  of  Infant 
Baptism,"  449 

Walton,  Bp.  of  Chester,  407 

Warburton,  Bp.  of  Gloucester,  his  "  Divine 
Legation  of  Moses,"  459 

Ward,  delegate  to  Synod  of  Dort,  359 

Warham,  Archbp.  of  York,  135,  148,  164 

Waterland,  Dr.,  answers  Dr.  Clarke,  defence 
of  the  Church's  creed,  456 

Watson,  Bp.  of  Llandaff,  writes  agauist 
Gibbon,  459 

Waynfleet,  Bp.  of  Winchester,  171 

Wells,  Dr.,  answers  Dr.  Clarke,  456 

Wentworth,  Mr.,  his  bills  of  reformation,  321 

Wesley,  John,  character,  462 ;  work  of, 
462,  463;  badly  treated  by  the  Church, 
465;  a  sound  Churchman,  465,  467;  his 
mock  consecration,  467 ;  history  of  his 
followers,  468  note 

Westminster,  council  at,  82;  made  a 
bishopric  by  Henry  VIII.,  178 ;  its 
abbey  threatened  with  destruction  by 
Somerset,  206 ;  disputation  at,  in  1559, 
296 ;  Feckenham,  last  abbot  of,  303 

Westminster  Assembly,  the,  387,  389 

Whiston,  Dr.  AVilliam,  censured  by  Con- 
vocation, 445;  account  of,  455  ;  writes 
against  Anthony  Collins,  457 

Whitaker,  Dr.,  Calvinist,  340 

Whitby,  Council  of,  19,  31,  32 

White,  Bp.  of  Peterborough,  one  of  the 
Seven  Bishops,  431,  432;  deprived  as  a 
Non-Juror,  435;  heads  the  schism,  436 
and  note 

Whitcfield,  George,  a  Methodist  at  Oxford, 
his  talents,  463;  his  work,  464;  severs 
from  Wesley,  465 ;  his  followers  become 
"seceders,"  466;  the  "Evangelicals"  of 
the  same  type  as,  468 

Whitgift,  Archbp.  of  Canterbury,  suppresses 
Cartwright  at  Cambridge,  321 ;  appointed 
to  succeed  Archbp.  Grindal,  328;  sup- 
presses disorderly  Puritanism,  331 ;  his 
three  tests,  332  ;  his  Twenty-four  Articles, 


502 


ECCLESIA  ANGLICANA. 


^Whiting . 

333 ;  at  Hampton  Court  Conference,  345 ; 
the  Church  greatly  indebted  to  him,  349, 
350 

Whiting,  Abbot,  executed,  176 

Whittingliam,  translator  of  Genevan  New 
Testament,  308  note ;  lay  Dean  of  Dur- 
ham, 318 

Wi2;hard,  selected  to  be  Archbp.  of  Canter- 
bury, 34 

Wightman,  Edward,  burnt  for  heresy,  357 

AVilberforce,  Wm.,  Evangelical  layman, 
470 

Wild,  Dr.,  his  "  funeral  sermon  of  preach- 
ing," 399 

AVilfrid,  at  Council  of  Whitby,  32 ;  conse- 
crated abroad,  35 ;  Chad  appointed  to  his 
Bee  in  his  absence,  35 ;  Theodore  rein- 
states Wilfrid,  35 ;  but  breaks  up  his 
diocese,  36 ;  his  appeals  to  Rome,  40 ; 
his  mission  to  Sussex,  40 ;  is  reinstated 
at  Hexham,  41 ;  his  services  to  literature, 
39 

William  I.,  condition  of  Church  at  acces- 
sion of,  66-68 ;  his  ecclesiastical  laws, 
72 ;  refuses  homage  to  the  Pope,  73 ;  com- 
pared with  Henry  VIII.,  73 

AVilliam  II.,  despoils  the  Church,  77 ;  con- 
flicts with  Anselm,  77,  78 

Williams,  Dean,  made  Lord-Keeper  and 
Bp.  of  Lincoln,  361 ;  disgraced  and  im- 
prisoned, 364 ;  invited  to  impeach  Laud, 
382 

Williams,  Isaac,  a  Tractarian,  474 

Williams  v.  Bp.  of  Salisbury,  484 

Wilson  V.  Fendale,  484 

Winchelsey,  Archbp.  of  Canterbury,  102 

Winchester,  Synod  at,  forbids  clerical  mar- 
riages, 76 

Winchester,  Marquis  of,  abets  the  Marian 
persecution,  267 

Winifrid,  see  Boniface 

Wolsey,  Cardinal,  under  -  estimated,  142; 
his  rise,  143 ;  his  administration  in 
Church  and  State,  137,  143-146;  dis- 
creditably  implicated    in    the   Divorce 


Zwingle. 

intrigue,  146  ;  his  downfall,  147  ;  his 
religious  toleration,  191, 192 

Wood's  account  of  the  Puritan  students  at 
Oxford,  396 

Woodard,  Canon,  his  middle-class  schools, 
478 

Woolston,  his  "Six  Discourses  on  the 
Miracles,"  457,  458  ;  the  first  Deist  con- 
fessor, 458 

■Worcester  House  Declaration,  rejected  by 
the  Commons,  406 

Worms,  Diet  of,  138 

Wotton,  Dr.,  answers  Lord  Shaftesbury, 
459 

Wren,  Sir  Christopher,  his  churches  in 
London,  449 

Wren,  Bp.  of  Ely,  382  ;  imprisoned,  333 

Wriothesley,  Lord  Chancellor,  excluded 
from  the  Council,  205 

Wykeham,  William  of,  Bp.  of  Winchester, 
120 

Wyclif,  John,  reformer.  Master  of  Baliol, 
119;  inveighs  against  Prelate-Statesmen 
— supported  by  Duke  of  Lancaster — his 
mission  to  Bruges,  120 ;  his  attacks  on 
the  i'ope — summoned  to  St.  Paul's — de- 
nounced by  the  Pope,  121 ;  unwittingly 
encourages  socialism,  122 ;  his  disgrace 
and  retirement,  122 ;  his  religious  sys- 
tem, 123,  124 ;  how  dangerous,  125,  126 ; 
his  Bible  suppressed,  123,  129,  130  and 
notes 


Ximenes,  Cardinal,  the  reformer,  134 


York,  Archbishopric  of,  29,  37  note,  39, 
75  and  note 


Zwing'le,  the  reformer,  139 


Date  Due                           1 

MY  2  9 '50 

JA2b'5' 

\ 

K£  9    '53 

FE  23  '53 

^ 

BW5020  .J54 

Ecclesia  Anglicana  :  a  history  of  the 


1   inip  nnn^5  7378 


